Agnostic.com

10 21

Two Separate Bigfoot Sightings Reported In SC This Year
[wsoctv.com]

Don't go away too quickly here!! I did the due diligence and have exciting things to report. 😁

These are not the same Bigfoot that was carrying a baby recently. These are different Bigfoots.

And this article? It gave us this:

The report noted it was the first β€œmulti-witness daylight sighting” (meaning highly reliable) of a sasquatch close to the Atlantic Ocean’s shoreline.

According to its website, the BFRO was founded in 1995. It’s made up of scientists, journalists and specialists from diverse backgrounds. It’s the oldest and largest organization of its kind, the site said.

β€œThe organization essentially seeks to resolve the mystery surrounding the Bigfoot phenomenon, that is, to derive conclusive documentation of the species’ existence,” the website says.*

OK. Scientists, journalists and specialists! Wow!

There's really one on significant issue I could find on the site.

It's batshit crazy. 🀭

Take a look.

[bfro.net]

In-part:
What are the undisputed facts about the bigfoot / sasquatch mystery?

It's a fact that for more than 400 years people have reported seeing large, hair-covered, man-like animals in the wilderness areas of North America.

It is a fact that sightings of these animals continue today. Real or not, these reports are often made by people of unimpeachable character.

It is a fact that, for over seventy years, people have been finding, photographing, and casting sets of very large human-shaped tracks. Most are discovered by chance in remote areas. These tracks continue to be found to this day.

It is a fact that the cultural histories of many Native American and First Nation peoples include stories and beliefs about non-human "peoples" of the wild. Many of these descriptions bear a striking resemblance to the hairy man-like creatures reported today.

These are some of the facts. There is, however, much disagreement as to what these facts mean.

To many, these facts, taken together, suggest the presence of an animal, probably a primate, that exists today in very low population densities. If true, this species, having likely evolved alongside humans, became astonishingly adept at avoiding human contact through a process of natural selection.

To others, these same facts point to a cultural phenomenon kept alive today through a combination of the misidentification of known animals, wishful thinking, and the deliberate fabrication of evidence.

The BFRO, and its members, take the former view.

SeaGreenEyez 9 Aug 28
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

10 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

The site might be batshit crazy but so are many TV channels these days. One in my area is Story TV and they do indeed tell you a story. Sometimes it is accurate and other times it is totally crazy. I can imagine the gullible saying, "well, it could happen."

0

Natural selection?

Natural selection is a mechanism of evolution. Organisms that are more adapted to their environment are more likely to survive and pass on the genes that aided their success.

Since there are no documented cases of a bigfoot / sasquatch having been killed by a human, they have all survived any encounters. I fail to see any mechanism of natural selection at work.

10

It’s me . I am sorry . Can’t hide anymore .
I wear size ten . My feet is the ugliest feet ever seen attached to a female body .
The hair . They grow like grass , and at slightest humidity I look like 4 poodles .
Waking nights in the woods and other remote areas … well , I am sure that’s coming too in my near future when I totally lose my shit w humans .
I am gonna be a famous Bigfoot one day and u all can say β€œ I knew her β€œπŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚
U are welcome friends πŸ™ŒπŸ™ŒπŸ™ŒπŸ™ŒβœŒπŸ»βœŒπŸ»βœŒπŸ»βœŒπŸ»β™₯️β™₯️β™₯️β™₯️

Instead of β€œI am Spartacus”; I am Sasquatch”!

Will you be wearing 6" platforms too?

@Charlene β€œ these boots are made for walking β€œπŸ™ŒπŸ˜‚πŸ™ŒπŸ˜‚πŸ™ŒπŸ˜‚πŸ™ŒπŸ˜‚πŸ’ͺπŸ’ͺπŸ’ͺ

My feet are size 13 but actually nice-looking, no corns or bunions or hair or weirdness....it's a damn good thing because shoes that do not make me look like Minnie Mouse are a Bitch to find!

@AnneWimsey 13 ?? Ok ! That’s great ! We can be Bigfoots tghr Annie , let’s do it !!! I couldn’t ask for a better company !!!πŸ™ŒπŸ™ŒπŸ™ŒπŸ™ŒπŸ™Œβ™₯️β™₯️β™₯️β™₯️β™₯️β™₯️β™₯️

2

In an old evolution vs. creationism Yahoo group, one Christian guy claimed Bigfoot was real and God was saving it for His purpose sometime in the future - this was why none of these sightings has been conclusive; God wasn't ready to reveal them to humanity. πŸ€”πŸ˜²πŸ™„πŸ˜†πŸ˜…πŸ˜‚

4

IDK if there are bigfoot. I had a relative that said they had a bigfoot try an break into their chicken coop. There dogs were barking and hiding under the front porch. My relative scared it of with their flashlight.

4

Maybe it was big foot who ate my sunflowers.

3

They should integrate with Flat Earthers and E.U (Elec Universe) enthusiasts..they could make Shaquille it's President for life..and name it Flat Earth E.U of Bigfoot Institute, hell I'd join for the S&G's..

7

They never try to explain never finding the remains of Bigfoot, or never seeing an adolescent Bigfoot. We find remains of dinosaurs and ancient humans all over the planet, but no Bigfoot. By the way is the plural of Bigfoot, Bigfoots or Bigfeet? These all important questions sometimes keep me awake at night. 😁

I think the plural is Bigfootes..

4

People have also seen Jesus for over 400 years. I don't believe them, either.

And he appears on toast and dog butts..

@Charlene which must mean that the sightings are factual!

6

And the correct answer is....

deliberate fabrication of evidence!

πŸ˜‚

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:683818
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.