Bigfoot News October 14, 2013

Wildlife conservation organization has had the body of an Orang Pendek for 17 years! The Wildlife Conservation Service out of New York is a conservation organization that works to protect habitat and wildlife all over the world. One of the places they work is Sumatra. In Sumatra, one of the places they work is the Barisan Mountains in southern Sumatra.
There is a large national park here. Here they try to save the Sumatran tiger, the Sumatran rhinoceros, the Asian elephant among many other species. There is a team of tiger biologists working in this area who have been working here for quite some time. Apparently these tiger biologists came across the body of an Orang Pendek somehow. Either it was shot by the team or else they got in from local villagers – this much is not certain.
Although it may seem amazing that they have been sitting on this body for 17 years, this is apparently the truth. These people are tiger biologists, and all they want to do is study tigers. They wanted nothing to do with a “hairy man.”
They felt that this creature was radioactive, and it was buried and not dealt with for a long time due to political reasons. There were concerns that their funding might be affected or cut off if they were to come out with this new great ape. Furthermore, they did not have the faintest idea what it is. The truth is that they and others have spent the last 17 years studying this thing and trying to figure out exactly what it is. They plan to publish their findings in 2016, but that assumes that they will get through peer review.
One might think it odd that they sat on this body for 17 years, but if you recall, the team working on the Olinguito worked on this animal for 10 years before finally bringing their findings forward in a scientific journal. That is, they discovered that it existed 10 years ago and then it took 10 years after that to get their findings together in a publishable format to bring it to the scientific world. You see it can take some time to bring a new species to science.
Adam Davies, the British explorer who is also working on trying to find the Orang Pendek, stated that he had never heard that anyone had a body, and he said he is pretty well connected. However, my source told me that the WCS biologists are hiding this species not only from Davies from from the world as a whole. I asked my source what would happen if someone called the WCS to see if this story is true, and he said they would probably deny it.
The Orang Pendek is most probably a hominid, possibly related to Homo Floresiensis or Flores Man on the island of Flores. Flores Man seems to be a very early Erectus or possibly a very late Australopithecine. Many think that the Orang Pendek is some sort of an ape or pongid such as an orangutan which also lives in the area. However, it is bipedal and only Homo is bipedal. It is unlikely that any of the great ape lines outside of Homo (chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans) have evolved bipedalism.

Some say that Orang Pendeks are just misidentified gibbons, but I doubt if this is true. There are gibbons that live in the area also, but villagers insist that the two are different creatures.
Some say that Orang Pendeks are just misidentified gibbons, but I doubt if this is true. There are gibbons that live in the area also, but villagers insist that the two are different creatures.

My source is a scientist who studies DNA. He told me that he saw three photos of the Orang Pendek on a WCS computer at a WCS office and was told that the body was acquired in 1996. He also learned something of the back story on the body. He told that there was no way that the photos of the creature could possibly be obtained. As a scientist, I consider him to be an extremely credible individual.
Very nice drawing of an Orang Pendek.
Very nice drawing of an Orang Pendek.

Bigfoot photos from Brenda Harris. Harris is apparently out of the Navajo Reservation in New Mexico and she has worked closely with JC Johnson on Bigfoot samples. In June, she revealed a photo of a possible Bigfoot, probably taken on the Navajo Reservation. The photos are below.
The real photo from Brenda Harris, probably from the Navajo Reservation.
The real photo from Brenda Harris, probably from the Navajo Reservation.

Same photo zoomed in. This photo is very odd, but the size and shape looks a lot like a Bigfoot. In addition, Harris' contacts are probably good and I doubt if there are a lot of sophisticated hoaxers on the Navajo Reservation.
Same photo zoomed in. This photo is very odd, but the size and shape looks a lot like a Bigfoot. In addition, Harris’ contacts are probably good and I doubt if there are a lot of sophisticated hoaxers on the Navajo Reservation.

More on the Matilda photos. One thing you will notice about the Matilda photos is the dramatically protruding lower jaw. In the video, the whole face moves and the muscles in this jaw and mouth area can be seen very well. Now in order for this to be a person wearing a mask, that person would have to have a jaw that is as prognathous or protruding as Matilda’s. Such humans are rare or nonexistent. Otherwise the wearer’s face will not fit properly into the mask and efforts to move the face inside the mask will not look realistic.
In addition, Matilda has an underbite, quite a large one at that. It moves when she opens and closes her mouth. I would think that would be very hard to do with a mask. The person wearing the mask would have to have the same underbite as Matilda’s to make it look realistic.
Interview with a Hollywood special effects expert. According to special effects expert Doug Hudson, almost all Bigfoot hoaxes use only 3-4 different masks and costumes. Custom masks and costumes are few and far between. The only ones I have seen were in hoaxes perpetrated by independent movie directors and Hollywood special effects experts. Even the best of these hoaxes looked nowhere near as good as this Matilda footage.
Most of them were easily identifiable as hoaxes. I have also seen quite a few Bigfoot suits and masks that have been used in Bigfoot movies. They are all quite obvious, and I have yet to see a mask or costume in a Bigfoot movie that looks anywhere near as good as this Matilda footage. If the Matilda footage is a hoax, it is the finest fake Bigfoot footage ever done, surpassing anything done in any Hollywood Bigfoot movie and beyond any Bigfoot hoaxes done by movie directors or special effects artists.
Hudson also makes the claim that just the raw materials alone for a custom Bigfoot suit and mask would run you $10,000 and to purchase one from a special effects guy would cost $40,000. The masks and suits used in the hoaxes and movies above probably cost between $60-80,000 to produce and would probably require at least 100 man-hours. Idiotic human garbage in the comments threads and on skeptard sites like JREF have been calling those figures ludicrous and laughing at them. Hey, they didn’t come from me. Take it up with Doug Hudson, the expert!
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBMOaajH8UU]
I consider this expertise far beyond Roger and Sissy, the owners of the property. In addition, they did not have the savvy nor the means to purchase custom Bigfoot suits and masks from Hollywood special effects people.
Therefore, I do not believe the Matilda footage is hoaxed.
Problems with the Kentucky footage. An expert from the Smithsonian I consulted told me that the main thing that bothered him about the Matilda footage was the nose. He stated that Bigfoots all have noses that look human, and Matilda’s nose looks canine. However, recall that Justin Smeja’s description of the young Bigfoot at the Sierra Kills stated that the juvenile had a nose like a Boxer dog. The nose may be somewhat canine in the young Bigfoots but only develop a human form when they mature. And keep in mind that Matilda was immature.
The Sleeping Bigfoot footage is good, but the expert I talked to said that the hair could be either real fur or fake fur. This is because it is very tousled and tangled. Tousled, tangled fur can look a lot like fake fur. He also said that the fur did not look like that of any known animal.
In addition, some think that Adrian Erickson is somewhat gullible. For instance, Adrian thought that Fraud Standings hoaxed Bigfoot tiki dolls were real Bigfoot footage. Adrian was ready to buy Fraud’s footage until his friends stopped him. Adrian simply lacks the expertise to determine hoaxed from real Bigfoot footage, in general.
In favor of the Sleeping Bigfoot footage. It is said that this footage is either a carpet, a dog or a human wearing a suit. However, keep in mind that Dennis Pfohl notes that the creature was breathing only 6 breaths per minute. A dog breathes at the low end no less than 10-15 breaths per minute. Furthermore, dogs’ bodies do not go up and down when they breathe like this thing. Could it be a human in a suit? It is very hard for a human to naturally breathe only 6 breaths per minute.
It can be done with a lot of practice, but bottom line is it is just not normal. Perhaps if you gave a human some morphine, their breathing might go that low. Furthermore, human’s bodies do not slowly go up and down when they breathe the way the creature’s do. Another argument is that it is Hollywood special effects. However, Roger and Sissy did not have the means or the savvy necessary to pay a Hollywood studio to create a fake breathing carpet.
Complaints about the owners of the Kentucky property. Roger and Sissy, owners of the property, have been described as being “somewhat shady,” “crazy,” and “opportunistic” by some of the Bigfooters who were aware of them. I am not sure how much of this is true and how much is not. However, I do know that at least the man was able to go through money pretty quickly.
Young Bigfoots may have grooming claws. From Justin Smeja comes word that the juvenile Bigfoot he shot had a grooming claw on its thumb. Some ape and monkey species have grooming claws. You can see one in the photo below.
lemur claw
This lemur has a grooming claw on its thumb. The baby Bigfoot was also said to have a grooming claw.

Dr. Brian Sykes Bigfoot DNA project will air on British TV on Patty Day. Patty Day is October 20. October 20, 1967 is when Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin shot the famous Patty footage at Bluff Creek, California. Is it interesting that he is going to release his earthshaking DNA data on Patty Day? Hmm.
Todd Neiss reports Sykes has “blockbuster findings.” Neiss runs some sort of a Bigfoot research organization in Oregon. He recently stated that although he has been sworn to secrecy, the Sykes DNA study has some blockbuster findings. We have been hearing this sort of thing for a long time now, and it sounds very promising.
Sykes has acquired samples of purported Yeti and Orang Pendek material. A source has just informed me that Sykes has acquired purported Yeti hair and purported Orang Pendek hair. Should be most interesting to see if these samples are valid, how they come back DNA-wise. Adam Davies reports that the Orang Pendek sample comes from him. They are from either an Orang Pendek, a tapir or a tiger. Those are the three animals that he and Cliff Barackman were tracking at the time in Sumatra last year.

Please follow and like us:
error3
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

0 thoughts on “Bigfoot News October 14, 2013”

  1. Martin,
    Sykes was asked to test Justin’s items by http://bigfootology.com/
    Specifically by Mr. Rhettman A. Mullis, Jr., MS, MHP – Washington State, USA – President of Bigfootology, Chairman of the Board
    Who also was incontact with Mr. Bart Cutino – California, USA, Representative, Board Member and Mr. Justin Smeja – California, USA, Representative
    I suggest you get your back story correct on how Sykes heard about the shooting,

    1. Oh. Come. On.
      I love how a hundred or so of us are the only ones in the world who know about Dyer’s Bigfoot, it’s such a big secret. Please. You think everybody on that show hasn’t had a good laugh about it? What about Randles…he’s been buds with Dyer since the beginning. You think he didn’t mention it along the way? Anyone who still says there’s a chance Dyer has a Bigfoot is just trolling now.

  2. Cyberstalking is the use of the Internet or other electronic means to stalk or harass an individual, a group of individuals, or an organization.[1] It may include the making of false accusations or statements of fact (as in defamation), monitoring, making threats, identity theft, damage to data or equipment, the solicitation of minors for sex, or gathering information that may be used to harass. The definition of “harassment” must meet the criterion that a reasonable person, in possession of the same information, would regard it as sufficient to cause another reasonable person distress.[2] Cyberstalking is different from spatial or offline stalking in that it occurs through the use of electronic communications technology such as the internet. However, it sometimes leads to it, or is accompanied by it.[3] Both are criminal offenses.[4] Cyberstalking shares important characteristics with offline stalking; many stalkers – online or off – are motivated by a desire to control their victims.[5]
    A cyberstalker may be an online stranger or a person whom the target knows. A cyberstalker may be anonymous and may solicit involvement of other people online who do not even know the target.
    Cyberstalking is a criminal offense that comes into play under state anti-stalking laws, slander laws, and harassment laws. A cyberstalking conviction can result in a restraining order, probation, or even criminal penalties against the assailant, including jail.
    So E2me this is the above definition of what cyberstalking is.
    would you like to go point by point of what is being done to people or are you willing to agree that these people posting information on someone in any form as they are doing is by legal definition cyber stalking?

    1. So Cathiee, what exactly was it when you dug up Racer X’s personal information and passed it on to POS? Remember that night? The night you were in the hangout having a good laugh because he had been outed? Remember that? Always the victim but never the perpetrator, right Cathiee?
      What a pathetic person you are Matt.

    2. Matthiee, remember when you kept saying you could use your office to get people’s personal information? Remember that? Remember that night in the google hangout when you were laughing and posting the links to Racer X’s personal information that you claimed you help dig up? Remember that big laugh you and the crew in POS’s hangout had that night?
      Isn’t that the exact same thing you fucking pea-brain?
      Are you really as dumb as you come across online? Really that dumb and pathetic?

  3. Let me point this out.
    ” motivated by a desire to control their victims”
    That is what these people are trying to do.

    1. Let me point this out. No one cares.
      And before you say that I obviously care because I posted in this thread, no, please, I don’t give a shit either, so don’t keep posting on my account.

  4. “Anyone know the definition of insanity ?
    – Doing the same things over and over, but expecting a different
    result each time”.
    This sums up the last day of posts in 2 sentences perfectly E2me.
    Hey Robert how about some BF updates, this thread has too many miles on it already!

  5. I don’t appreciate Cathiee/Matt/JD accusing me of stalking Rick. I do NOT stalk Rick, I report on his antics.
    Robert and I have butted heads on the issue of Rick Dyer and it’s not my intention to disrupt his blog or the ongoing conversations (off topic) here.
    I simply felt the need to defend myself.
    Thanks

    1. Randy,
      Regardless if Matt is Cathiee you are stalking him. Your very own blog allows information such as IP address and such to be handed out by your posters.
      Randy you are just as responsible for the actions as well. You do not remove the comments where private information has been given.
      You can sit and try to defend yourselves but the law of cyber stalking you are doing it you are encouraging it.
      You asked Vegas Rob to send you the pictures of Rick and his wife that he took in secret while he was hiding from them. You are now an accomplice to the stalking and you and Richard can be held accountable as well.
      http://www.cyberstalking.ca/en/fact-sheets/legal-definition
      I suggest you familiar your self with the laws in Canada Randy
      The fact a person on your blog Randy said they would call Matt’s wife and work place. They would contact his employer doesn’t matter if they do or not that by definition is cyber stalking and is illegal. It is your blog and you are responsible for the content since you monitor it.
      You all are committing these crimes. With all the kids committing suicide these days based on harassment and stalking and being tried for it. You should all behave better.

      1. Does Robert need to keep banning every one of Cathiee’s personalities or can one banishment apply to all of them?

        1. JD, think what you wish to think. Robert was gracious enough to let me leave a comment here and I don’t want to derail the original topic more than you and your personalities have already.
          No addresses were posted and no photos were posted. End of story.
          Robert has a finite amount of patience, so I’d be careful if I were you.
          If Robert writes a future article talking about psychology and/or cyber-stalking, I’ll be happy to debate you in that arena.
          Have a nice day

        2. Randy,
          I suggest you check your own blog out post:
          Suggest you look at the following posts from:
          Financial Problems For Rick?
          AnonymousFriday, November 01, 2013 12:04:00 AM
          and
          AnonymousFriday, November 01, 2013 12:00:00 PM
          and
          AnonymousFriday, November 01, 2013 12:02:00 PM
          and
          AnonymousFriday, November 01, 2013 12:07:00 PM
          and
          AnonymousFriday, November 01, 2013 12:12:00 PM
          If you don’t stop pretending to be this woman maybe we should call Kimberly and see what she has to say about it? Maybe we should an email to susan baker and see what she thinks about it?
          and
          AnonymousFriday, November 01, 2013 12:35:00 PM
          “AnonymousFriday, November 01, 2013 12:35:00 PM
          Matt, seriously? You’re an IT manager. You should know how this works. Every person who views this blog leaves a footprint. Racer can see everyone’s ip address. He can see yours right now.”
          Those are all from your blog Randy.
          I again suggest you all review what internet cyber stalking is again.
          You are guilty of it so you are no better than what you say Rick or this Matt/Cathiee person is.
          This is not the old west you do not get to decide what justice is.
          We have laws of a civilized society and you are breaking them.

      2. That’s very interesting JD. The comment in Randy’s blog didn’t say who Kimberly was or who Susan Baker was. How is it YOU know who they are? You just busted yourself Matt Geiger aka Cathiee McMillan. Give it up and just go away.

        1. Chris P.
          I am not Matt or Cathiee,
          I suggest you go back and read the threads in the blog and you can come up with your conclusion that said person is his wife. While the other is associated to the post with his work information.
          I guess you can not read or comprehend very well when you read.

  6. I love how JD is not cathiee but refers to them in third person. Hilarious. Ok, ok Matthew. WE get it, you think we are ummm doing something illegal. None of us have emailed you, pmed you, called you or anyone at ur work or home. Nice try. So please, im begging you. Call the police. As i’ve said many times before, you know you aren’t going to do shit about it because you can’t. First of all, we haven’t done anything illegal. Second of all, you would be too embarrassed to even file a report about having your fake identity tied to your real life. It was ok when you were handing randy’s info over to rick and laughing about it though, right? There was nothing illegal about that right? Hell rick posted his address and his phone number. We only revealed who you really were. I have never in my life encountered such a whine bag as you Matthew of the Rose. Always wanting to play the victim and act as if you are innocent of being an aggressor.Is that why you pretended to be a woman who lost her husband and daughter in a car accident? Is that why you pretended to be a woman who was a victim of rape? Is that why you pretended to be the aunt of a victim from the denver theater shooting? You have used your access at work to look up people’s information before. All anyone has to do is google Cathiee Mcmillan and see the years of bad press you’ve gotten for stalking and harassing people. You don’t scare me in the slightest. Call the police Matt, please call them. hurry! what’s stopping you. It’s been three days now. Tell them some man named richard johnson told the world you were really a fat greasy pig who pretends to be a woman.

    1. Great post Richard. You nailed it completely. Matt can dish it out but he can’t take it when it’s returned. Nobody has done more stalking and harrassing than that fat, pathetic, piece of shit. And he absolutely stated several times he could use his office to dig up people’s personal information. Now he’s crying like a baby. He’s seriously delusional.

    2. Richard,
      Please read again what Cyberstalking is.
      “Cyberstalking refers to the act of threatening, harassing, or annoying someone through multiple email messages with the intention of placing the recipient in fear that an illegal act or an injury will be inflicted on the recipient, his/her family or household.”
      Please refer to the above posts that were placed in Randy’s blog,
      Threatening to call Matt’s wife and e-mail work place.
      You seem to not be able to comprehend that is the definition of cyber stalking and that you are doing it.
      You have gone on multiple places posting information about the person.
      This is cyber stalking.

      1. That’s very interesting JD. The comment in Randy’s blog didn’t say who Kimberly was or who Susan Baker was. How is it YOU know who they are?
        ” Threatening to call Matt’s wife and e-mail work place.”
        You just busted yourself Matt Geiger aka Cathiee McMillan. Give it up and just go away.

        1. Chris P.
          I am not Matt or Cathiee,
          I suggest you go back and read the threads in the blog and you can come up with your conclusion that said person is his wife. While the other is associated to the post with his work information.
          I guess you can not read or comprehend very well when you read.

  7. Matthew, can you just stop calling yourself JD already. It’s beyond ridiculous. You are that much of a pussy, that you still have to hide behind a fake name? Let’s take a look at the definition of cyber-stalking, since you love to throw out it so much. I’ll humor you, ya little cry baby.
    This part—->”with the intention of placing the recipient in fear that an illegal act or an injury will be inflicted on the recipient, his/her family or household.”
    Ok, so we know you are lying about anyone calling your house or your work. We didnt post that information anywhere. We didn’t post your address anywhere. Stop lying already. Nothing we has said would fit under putting you in fear that illegal act or injury would be inflicted upon you. It wouldn’t be illegal to call your wife and tell her that you pretended to be a man for more than 8 years and it wouldn’t bring about any injury. However, we didn’t call her douchebag. You love to paste silly links for people to clik on right? Why don’t you click on this one Matthew? Maybe you can find some new friends there who want to play. http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Am-A-Man-Who-Has-Pretended-To-Be-A-Woman-Online/227692

    1. What Is the Definition of Cyberstalking?
      Cyberstalking is a very serious form of online harassment. At one level, cyberstalking is much like cyberbullying, as it involves the sending of repeated annoying and unwelcome messages. But cyberstalking goes far beyond cyberbullying in terms of motivations and tactics. Cyberstalking involves a disturbed obsession with the target, and a perverse desire to control that target in some way, even by attacking the target’s family members. Cyberstalkers do not wish to just torment someone for an adolescent power rush… stalkers want to force the target into some kind of submission, and are willing to involve other targets to achieve that disturbed result.
      What Exactly Does Cyberstalking Look Like?
      Cyberstalkers like to use email, Facebook, Twitter, FourSquare, text messaging, and sexting as their primary tools. They sometimes use online dating services, discussion forums, and mobile phone devices to stalk their prey. If the stalker is a sophisticated user, he/she will use many of these means in combination.
      Cyberstalkers commonly have four objectives:
      locate,
      surveil,
      emotionally harass,
      and criminally manipulate their prey.
      In some cases, the cyberstalker will prey on their target’s family, friends, and coworkers to attack their target.
      You have threatened this to the person.
      Vegas Rob has stalked Rick and his family.
      You can keep trying to justify it but you are all guilty of it.

      1. Apparently Richard,
        You have a lack of understanding with what you are actually doing.
        The threat of doing it alone is considered cyber stalking.
        I again can not understand why in this age with kids killing themselves because of actions like your doing you would continue with your antics.
        You do understand law enforcement agencies are taking this more serious now these days.

        1. Matthie, you are just as guilty as anyone you are saying is. You repeatedly said you were going to use your office’s resources to dig up people’s private information. YOU found out Randy’s personal information and gave it to POS. You were in the hangout when POS released it and you were laughing it up with the rest ot team retard that night. You keep avoiding this but many people know exactly how much stalking you’ve done. The proof is all over the Bigfoot and SL forums.

        2. You really should be reading those definitions yourself Matthew, because you are just as guilty of them. Right Matthew Geiger? Right Matthew of the Rose? So tell us why you like pretending to be a woman? Is there some vagina envy going on there?

  8. Lucas, thanks for posting the BFFE3 link. Hope you see my message in all this disturbance. I guess there is a $hit storm going on somewhere that is interfering with normal lines of communication. If you receive my message, please respond.

      1. to woodchucker:
        if you are using the plug-in(it works) go into settings…make sure you are set on ‘stealth'(the little ghost dude)…I ah to set mine that way to get it to work….sorry I didn’t post that earlier
        J.L.
        PS: This episode is a bit better than the others(I think)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.