- Joined
- Feb 2, 2008
- Messages
- 14,458
- Reaction score
- 10,479
Well just watching that video, I don't see anything in it that leads me to believe it couldn't just be a dude in a monkey suit. It also looks a lot like a person in how it stands up at the end. Looks pretty human in a suitish to me. I'm also not really believing the run at the end. Dude was calm enough to stand there filming it but the second it stands up he decides he needs to go crashing through the brush to escape? Just seems like poorly made fiction.
Even the Freeman footage is lame. Nothing about it looks like wild ape to me. Half of the time it looks like some dude staring at the ground trying not to trip while walking around in a monkey suit.
I just don't find this evidence compelling enough to believe in something so extraordinary as a big monkey. If anything I'm far more willing to believe that they were tricked by people who thought it would be funny to pretend to be bigfoot for some lunatic in the woods looking for bigfoot. That seems more reasonable than the monkey to me.
I'm sorry i ruin your fun fantasy world of magic, bigfoot, ghosts, crystals, Jesus, McFlurry, Q-anon, flat earther and whatever other crazy things people make up. I just can't help the way my brain works. Is it not a good thing to have high standards for information you use to go through life with? You're talking like using logic and accurate facts is a bad thing, which sounds crazy to me. The real world is cool enough for me. There are plenty of amazing things that actually exist in this world. That shit doesn't excite you more than silly fiction like bigfoot?
If you don't like what I have to say, you can choose not to interact with me. It's not like I'm knocking on your front door demanding you listen to me.
Are you aware of how silly that sounds? Not even humans are smart enough to remain hidden from humans. You're now attributing super-genius and super-lucky characteristics to an animal to explain why there's no actual evidence of said animal even existing. It seems like a poor standard to be able to declare something as real on the basis that we can't prove it doesn't exist. You're getting into Flying Spaghetti Monster territory at that point.
You keep making this leap that autheicirt of video automatically concludes that this is a Bigfoot The whole argument here has been whether or not the thing in the video is a man in suit or not. That is the lowest denominator of my premise
You didn't answer my question I asked if you felt these videos were in the same league as PG

