Seems there are all kinds of possibilities.

Some DNA testing and then the Bigfoot mystery is solved -- finally.

All the skeptics and naysayers will be served a slice of humble pie.

Truthseekers unite!

"History repeats?

This is not the first time a Bigfoot body has been claimed to have been found. A man named Tom Biscardi, founder of something called the Great American Bigfoot Research Organization, once claimed he had captured a Bigfoot. On Aug. 19, 2005, Biscardi appeared on the radio show "Coast to Coast with George Noory." Biscardi claimed his group had captured a Bigfoot a week earlier, a male beast that weighed over 400 pounds and stood 8-feet tall. He said he would be presenting photos of it several days later. It turned out to be a hoax.

Interestingly, Biscardi is also involved in the new Bigfoot body discovery.

Speaking on behalf of the Georgia men this week, Biscardi said, "Extensive scientific studies will be done on the body by a team of scientists including a molecular biologist, an anthropologist, a paleontologist and other scientists over the next few months at an undisclosed location" under armed guard."

Deja vu all over again.

On a brighter note, the Chupacabra, or "goatsucker", turns out to be just Lippy sans his everyday make-up.

Bullshit.

All they found was Sonny Perdue's family.

I've always been fascinated by the likes of UFO's, Loch Ness, Bigfoot, Yeti, etc.

Regarding Bigfoot:

I've seen the one piece of film footage in existence of Big Foot that is extremely compelling.

First, all of the creatures movements were digitized and then a scientific team had a well-conditioned athlete attempt to mimic the creature's gait and movements - he had all sorts of censors attached to his body. Long story short, he was unable to mimic the creature's movements. Also, on one frame as the creature turns, it's mouth opens - pretty hard to do if it was a human in an ape suit wearing a mask.

Lots of other credible evidence exists as well.

In short, I firmly believe that a small population of ape-like creatures do exist in the United States.

Now, as for Loch Ness - nope.

I do not for a moment believe that a pleiasaur, or a small population of pleiasaurs are living in the Loch. I've studied this one as well and the evidence just isn't there.

Jeffj, why would you believe in big-foot and not loch ness?

Have you ever been around country boys while they have a belly full of beer and are out in the woods camping or hunting or playing deliverance or something?

Making someone think they've seen big-foot is considered good sport.

How come big foot never shows up at a wal-mart and asks a cop for directions? When that happens, I'll believe in them.

Lip,

Examination of the available evidence.

Bigfoot has credible evidence that stands up to scientific scrutiny to support its existence.

Loch Ness doesn't.

Bigfoot would kick your ass with a car antenna.

-Jeffalo Bob

"Bigfoot has credible evidence that stands up to scientific scrutiny to support its existence."

LOL.

"Bigfoot has credible evidence that stands up to scientific scrutiny to support its existence."

LOL.

Posted by BetelG

[citation needed] in both cases.

Zat,

Regarding Bigfoot, multiple documentaries on Animal Planet - they were compelling in favor of it's existence. From the same source, they were compelling in dispelling the existence of Loch Ness.

Zatoichi-
'Strange happenings in the woods' does not = 'pet theory of a man-ape-giant'

Has anyone been keeping close tabs on the former tallest woman's corpse? If it comes up missing then you know where it ended up.

"Regarding Bigfoot, multiple documentaries on Animal Planet - they were compelling in favor of it's existence. From the same source, they were compelling in dispelling the existence of Loch Ness.

Posted by JeffJ at 2008-08-14 05:59 PM |"

Well, there you have it. The evidence for the existence of a large smelly ape/man with big feet hiding in the woods is compelling according to the show I watched on TV.

Zatoichi-
Sorry for the delay. Here's the citation:

(for "LOL", LOL)

Sorry folks, the identity of this big-mutha has been determined. An undercover leg breaker for a covert neo-con Republican group. He was about to go public or attempt to breed, either way he had to die.

lol

;^)

Jobs just mentioned on the radio ...

"underwear measure-er"
"porn inspector"

Fox News report on Youtube.

BetelG,

Well, there you have it. The evidence for the existence of a large smelly ape/man with big feet hiding in the woods is compelling according to the show I watched on TV.

Multiple shows - some of which tried to disprove the existence of Bigfoot.

Also some reading on the subject.

A lot of tangible evidence exists suggesting the existence of sasquatch:

Video - 1 in particular
Numerous eyewitness accounts
Hundreds of plastered footprints
Hairs that don't fall into currently existing animal classifications
Tape-recorded vocalizations that don't fall into currently existing classifcations
A plaster-cast of what seems to be a sasquatch in a prone position

In regards to these "TV shows" it was the scientific methodologies that were employed that most impressed.

Even barring the science behind the scrutiny, on its face the notion of Bigfoot is not at all far-fetched. Science uncovers new species all of the time, some of which are far more bizarre than a small population of intelligent bi-peds in the vast wilderness of North America.

Hell, it wasn't that long ago that the giant squid was the product of lore.

"Multiple shows - some of which tried to disprove the existence of Bigfoot."

Please continue.

Please.

"Big Foot"

14EEEEE

(uncut)

neatorama.com

Really?

Please.

Tell us some more, Buffalo Jeff.

So that's how Ken Lay's been hiding out!

Yes--and those were really UFO's in Dexter...

Let me be clear.

As compelling as some of the evidence is supporting the notion of Sasquatch, it is not incontrovertible.

During the video that was shot in the '60's, on 1 frame a bulge appears on the side of the thigh. It was consistent was a certain type of leg-injury - again, something very difficult to fake with an ape suit, particularly in light of the fact that at the time the video was shot, technologies had yet to be invented that have allowed for some of the more in-depth analysis of the video that have only recently come to light.

The one problem with the video is image quality - it is simply too grainy to be considered incontrovertible proof of the beast's existence.

I have the most compelling documentaries saved on my DVR.

The one problem with the video is image quality - it is simply too grainy to be considered incontrovertible proof of the beast's existence.

Have you ever considered the possibility that maybe Bigfoot is grainy?

"It is simply too grainy to be considered incontrovertible proof of the beast's existence...."

Therefore must be removed to the bin holding the grainy photo of the hadron collider.

Have you ever considered the possibility that maybe Bigfoot is grainy?

Yeah - he may just be a grainy creature.

Yeah - he may just be a grainy creature.

That's what happens when you eat too much Granola

.......Chuck Norris would fuck big-foot.........

Bigfoot?

Meh!

Is silly fable.

I wish it were true... but, more than likely it is a hoax...again.

But oooo it would rock the world and it would sure screw up the Christian Right and their theory of evolution...or lack thereof.

This guy has certainly put his reputation on the line for a hoax. I wouldn't be so quick to say it isn't real. I was never concerned about the reality of Big Foot, or Sasquatch, but I gave it about a 35% chance. Since this story, it has gone up to about 85%, and it will go dramatically one way or the other in the next few days as this story developes. More pics on Friday.

"I gave it about a 35% chance. Since this story, it has gone up to about 85%"

Thank God I was sitting when I read this shocking news.

Last I heard, Bigfoot was sleeping in the Pyramids, exhaling through smokestacks on the moon, and defending himself with a car antenna, which proves the Democratic primary is flawed.

Danforth

Still upset about that little ass kicking I see.

;-)

The Georgia Democratic party will on pins and needles waiting to see if they can register a few new voters. Unless of course they find out they are Portorrican. They will be Hillary voters.

"It would sure screw up the Christian Right and their theory of evolution...."

You mean the Damned By Science Bigfoot? I'm not sure you understand the state of that controversy all that well.

What I'd expect Bigfoot to do, first and foremost, is rehabilitate the rep of eyewitness accounts.

But as to Bigfoot itself, hominid or pongid? I don't expect you to understand this, but science is bored in advance.

I don't expect you to understand this, but science is bored in advance.

Posted by Zed

Pray tell, Zed, could you tell me what this sentence means? I'll came back later and slam you if you are saying what i think you're saying?

I still say Bigfoot/Sasquatch is just a universal redneck trick.

Did you know that, in the south, you can just go out in the cow pasture and pluck mushrooms out of the ground after a little rain.

I bet they end up claiming that they won't turn the body over because people might use it to figure out where it came from and that would endanger the other animals.

Just a hunch.

on Animal Planet

Priceless.

Sully,

Without first hand examination of "the body" by anyone, I am calling Shenanigans.

How did Bigfoot get from the Pacific Northwest to Georgia without being noticed?

He drove.

"Without first hand examination of "the body" by anyone, I am calling Shenanigans."

Well of course but if you're hoaxing then you can't very well produce a body. I'm just trying to figure out what excuse they are going to use when they don't produce.

If you found a bigfoot body would you let it sit around and decompose for days before turning it over to people who can study it properly or would you try to get it to a facility that is equipped to preserve it?

I actually hope I'm wrong but their behavior doesn't make much sense to me if they actually found something worth studying.

I guess this means Obama has found his VP running mate!

So the Georgians had BMD? (bigfoots with massive doo-doo)

Good thing Putin got there just in time.

FF for Corky

It weighs over five hundred pounds.
*The creature looks like it is part human and part ape-like.
*It is male.

could also be a missing Drudgey....

"a missing Drudgey...."

Posted by northguy3

Lokisfur?

This is not Bigfoot or as Dave suggested, Sonny Perdue's family(though the resemblance and mental capacity are similar).

This will just turn out to be Jimmy Joe Bob from Shady Meadows Mobile Home Park and Bait Shop over by Lula.

"intelligent bi-peds in the vast wilderness of North America. "

Posted by JeffJ

Well this statement proves you are simply full of crap.

There are no intelligent bi-peds in North America.

"Tom Biscardi of Searching for Bigfoot is supposed to present DNA and photographic evidence of the find on Friday August 15, 2008. "
I'm going with "the material was scooped up by guys in black helicopters before we could show you," by 6 PM EDT.

Get back to us on August 15th. Evidence or STFU. Kooks state on a weekly basis they found Bigfoot. As a bonus, one of the kooks involved in this said he found Bigfoot before and was proven a kook then. Why do you have a sudden hardon because another kook pops up and says "I have this.. but _I'll PROVE IT LATER_"

bOoB, you'll believe anything told to you by anyone; provided they aren't the establishment. It seems the LESS credible they are, the more you believe them.

Have you ever been around country boys while they have a belly full of beer and are out in the woods camping or hunting or playing deliverance or something?

Posted by Lipzoidial

Have you? Did they make you squeal?

I bet they end up claiming that they won't turn the body over because people might use it to figure out where it came from and that would endanger the other animals.

Just a hunch.

Posted by Sully at 2008-08-15 09:24 AM | Reply | Flag:

And somehow, to bOoB, that will change that 85% to 100%.

Buffalo_Jubblies is on to something here.

If you look closely at the photo, there appear to be large cuts on the body, and injuries to the eyes, as if attacked by a hunter with a car antenna.

How did Bigfoot get from the Pacific Northwest to Georgia without being noticed?

Ever been on a Greyhound bus?

(AP) Matthew Witton and Rickie Dyer were walking through the woods with a noose in one hand, and a negro in the other. That's when it happened. "I said it smelled like bigfoots dick" said Rickie. "It turns out the colored fella just farted" replied Matthew.

"Still upset about that little ass kicking I see."

Don't worry...you'll get over it.

If you look closely at the photo, there appear to be large cuts on the body, and injuries to the eyes, as if attacked by a hunter with a car antenna.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-08-15 11:18 AM | Reply |

If you look even closer, you'll notice Big Foot's gun is still in the dresser drawer. He was never able to get to it in order to defend himself.

Old negroes never die, they just smell that way.

"If you look even closer, you'll notice Big Foot's gun is still in the dresser drawer. He was never able to get to it in order to defend himself."

Posted by 101Chairborne

If only he had taken Buff_Tits' advice on transceiver home defense.

bOoB, you'll believe anything told to you by anyone; provided they aren't the establishment. It seems the LESS credible they are, the more you believe them.

Posted by soheifox at 2008-08-15 11:15 AM | Reply

I believe what I see and what is logical. It seems to be TODAY will determine if it is real or not. I guess you think these people are making all this up. What do you see sheep?

Okay, I have to revise my 6 PM EDT call. They are releasing the "evidnece" in California. Apparently they don't believe in DNA in Georgia.

"What do you see"

I see what looks like a man in a well-made ape costume. Or some kind of ape. I also see a bucket of bones in a small photograph. Is this supposed to be proof of something?

"Is this supposed to be proof of something?"

Yes.

Anyone can learn Photoshop.

I believe what I see and what is logical. It seems to be TODAY will determine if it is real or not. I guess you think these people are making all this up. What do you see sheep?

www.youtube.com

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-08-15 11:29 AM | Reply | Flag:

You know what I see in that video, bOoB? I see a pile of what the hell ever in a cooler, and a new story about a bunch of guys who refuse to show any evidence to any scientists; but they show it to a different kook. I don't care what a REPEATED PROVEN KOOK has to say. I want to see a full department of a university, say UIUC studying it. I want the Smithsonian involved in this. I want REPUTABLE SOURCES involved in it.

Don't you get it? You showed me a video of a kook saying he found something, like that proves the kook actually found something.

Here's a headsup for you. If this were real life I would say it slow so you have a better chance of parsing this. A Bigfoot-hunting kook showing pictures of a costume in a cooler and saying he found Bigfoot proves nothing except that a bigfoot-hunting kook has a pile of something in a cooler.

That's not PROOF, you boob, that's circular reasoning.

What do you see sheep?

www.youtube.com

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-08-15 11:29 AM | Reply

Some crusty old loser with a beard and a Puma "Jogging Suit" trying to look credible by mention the people that found him are an ex-Screw and a suspended copper.

"I want to see UIUC studying it. I want the Smithsonian involved in this"
Posted by soheifox

If the Smithsonian or UIUC get involved and say the bigfoot evidence is false, I'll KNOW bigfoot is real. After all, these are the same folks who say car antenna are for picking up some mystic force called 'radio', not for defending yourself.

Signed,
Buffalo Bob

I saw a documentary one that proved once an for all that Bigfoot exists. It's all over the internet. I'm surprised it slipped by under your sheep noses.

Lee, sir, you win a free Internet. I'm surprised you were the first to think to go there.

Oopsy?
The guys over at www.BFRO.net have already called the discovery-- a hoax.

The Georgia Bigfoot Body-- story is a hoax, started by two fellows in Georgia. The body-- is a widely available Halloween costume stuffed into a large cooler, with some animal entrails laid on top. This ongoing hoax is now being orchestrated by a notorious hoaxer named Carmine Thomas Biscardi,-- read a message on the websites home page.

Allegedly, the two hunters first contacted Biscardi shortly after their discovery.

From BFRO.net:

Biscardi perpetrated a similar bigfoot body-- hoax on a nationally syndicated radio show in 2005. He confessed to the hoax on the air when pressed by the irate talk show host, George Noory.

Biscardi recently announced a press conference for Friday in San Francisco or Palo Alto. The purpose of this grand ruse is to attract lots of attention to himself attention which he plans to parlay into various profiteering ventures, the profits from which he has undoubtedly agreed to share with the two original hoaxers,Whitton and Dyer.--

The website suspects the news conference will also be staged, with fake scientists and fake results.

Biscardi will waltz into the room with two smiling impostor Russian scientists-- who will say whatever Biscardi has paid them to say about the body-- that he will never allow the press to examine in the flesh, because it will be held elsewhere at a secure location pending further study,--

The news conference is scheduled for later today.

Soheifox,
I know. I'm still shocked.

Biscardi perpetrated a similar bigfoot body-- hoax on a nationally syndicated radio show in 2005. He confessed to the hoax on the air when pressed by the irate talk show host, George Noory.

Posted by northguy3 at 2008-08-15 11:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

I used to listen to Coast to Coast AM all the time, I even remember this show. To say Noory (always weirds me out it's spelled that way but pronounced no-ree) was "irate" is an understatement. You'd think Biscardi had raped George's son or something. He REALLY believed in Biscardi.

The nice thing about Coast to Coast AM is that.. unlike bOoB, when something is proven a hoax, they accept it. I loved Art Bell more, because he never committed belief to anything. He allowed people to speak their side, and did not judge one way or the other.

Northguy

So it is your contention that these guys paid $500 for a costume--took some pictures of it--and then expect the world to give them credibility.

In the link I posted--a newsperson was invited to an inspection of the body. That's going to be sort of tough to fake.

Either you are very stupid, or they are--we'll find out soon enough.

Apparently they don't believe in DNA in Georgia.

Posted by northguy3

It's not that they don't beleive in it, it is just that it is all the same DNA so why bother?

[Art Bell] allowed people to speak their side, and did not judge one way or the other.

Except channeling. He openly admitted he did not believe in that. But you are right about everything else. I listened for that very reason -- that and I loved the 'time travelers' who would call in.

They just released all of the photos and showed the body.

It was determined to be factual by three seperate scientists.

Either you are very stupid, or they are--we'll find out soon enough

so, bOoB -- fair is fair: If you think he (NG3) is stupid for disbelieving, you will admit that you yourself are stupid if this is proven to be a fake, right?

Or is this usual bOoB fare in which your playing field does not work both ways, but only in your favor?

The nice thing about Coast to Coast AM is that.. unlike bOoB, when something is proven a hoax, they accept it. I loved Art Bell more, because he never committed belief to anything. He allowed people to speak their side, and did not judge one way or the other.

Posted by soheifox at 2008-08-15 12:04 PM | Reply |

What hoax are you talking about that was proven a hoax? If something is proven wrong I easily accept the facts. It seems most people only accept facts they like. People like you in fact. If I see enough evidence for space aliens--I believe in space aliens. People like you believe whatever the rest of the sheep believe. If space aliens are proven someday--you'll be like the rest of the sheep and say you knew it all along.

I don't think people would spend $500 on suit to try to fool people for a couple of days--only to have your reputation fuined for life. I don't think they would go to all that trouble trying to preserve it in a frost free freezer if it was fake. Maybe that makes sense to you--but not to me. However, if it turns out that these guys are as stupid as you think--I'll have no problem believing there was no body. If it is a bigfoot--let's see how quick you are to apologize for your insult. My guess is you don't have the integrity for apologies--or any integrity for that matter.

so, bOoB -- fair is fair: If you think he (NG3) is stupid for disbelieving, you will admit that you yourself are stupid if this is proven to be a fake, right?

Or is this usual bOoB fare in which your playing field does not work both ways, but only in your favor?

Posted by goatman at 2008-08-15 12:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

No, he's going to dodge out by saying "I only 85% believed. I was wrong, Bigfoot exists, but these two people perpetrated a hoax". He's not going to admit that he is blinded by belief, and ignorant of scientific method.

It's on Drudge right now.

At least they didn't bury it like they did Hogzilla.

One cannot discount the possibility that this carcass is really the lost remains of a sad inbreeding gone wild.

"What hoax are you talking about that was proven a hoax?"

He went on Coast to Coast AM and was full of shit. I didn't read the rest of your statement because JESUS YOU'RE AN IDIOT, BOB. How many times do I have to tell you to use Google, you lazy kook?

...a newsperson...

From where? The Onion?

If something is proven wrong I easily accept the facts.

LOL. This is the funniest thing that I've ever heard you say, bOoB.

Actually, you are correct. Only problem is that you don't accept proven laws of physics and HS math as proof. You accept only youtube.com videos as proof.

See what I mean here? bOoB, you're just a true believer. If you had taken 5 minutes to research the guy, you'd know that this guy has been proven as full of shit. But the problem is that, like all true believers, you set out with a conclusion and don't trouble yourself seeking facts, because facts might disprove your conclusion.

Either you are very stupid, or they are--we'll find out soon enough

so, bOoB -- fair is fair: If you think he (NG3) is stupid for disbelieving, you will admit that you yourself are stupid if this is proven to be a fake, right?

Or is this usual bOoB fare in which your playing field does not work both ways, but only in your favor?

Posted by goatman at 2008-08-15 12:14 PM | Reply

Nice strawman dUmmy. I never said I believed. I said I was at about 35% before the story and at about 85% believing now--but that it would go one way or another dramatically in the coming days as more evidence is provided.

The only people professing any type of belief in this story are those saying it is a hoax--people like NG3--who profess to believe they spent 500 on this hoax--that's stupid if they did it--and he's stupid for believing they did it if they didn't.

Glad to see your record as a lying dUMmy is still intact. I doubt it will ever be broken.

One cannot discount the possibility that this carcass is really the lost remains of a sad inbreeding gone wild.

That's possible, in fact the most likely explanation if it is Bigfoot. But DNA analysis would easily prove this

See what I mean here? bOoB, you're just a true believer. If you had taken 5 minutes to research the guy, you'd know that this guy has been proven as full of shit. But the problem is that, like all true believers, you set out with a conclusion and don't trouble yourself seeking facts, because facts might disprove your conclusion.

Posted by soheifox at 2008-08-15 12:20 PM | Reply

I looked at the link. I don't think the guy is stupid enough to think he would fool anybody with a Big Foot suit. The idea is too stupid. You are the only one who believes anything about this story. I still have an open mind. I have no conclusions yet dUMMy. You just aren't bright enough to figure that out yet. Sad about your brain.

Nice strawman dUmmy. I never said I believed. I said I was at about 35% before the story and at about 85% believing now--but that it would go one way or another dramatically in the coming days as more evidence is provided.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-08-15 12:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

Toldya bOoB would say that. Is that proof I'm psychic?

I said I was at about 35% before the story and at about 85% believing now--

OK, bOoB -- I'll modify my question: If it is proven a hoax you will, out of the spirit of fairness and equity, admit that you are 85% stupid, right?

But DNA analysis would easily prove this

Posted by goatman at 2008-08-15 12:22 PM | Reply |

Most people aren't bright enough to STFU until the analysis comes out. People like you actually.

OK, bOoB -- I'll modify my question: If it is proven a hoax you will, out of the spirit of fairness and equity, admit that you are 85% stupid, right?

Posted by goatman at 2008-08-15 12:25 PM | Reply |

How about YOU Goatman? You never take a stand on anything,like the limp wristed punk you have proven yourself to be.

Stand up

Be counted.

Be a man for once.

Is this Big Foot story real or is it Bullshit?

who profess to believe they spent 500 on this hoax--that's stupid if they did it

LOL again and again.

You don't believe someone would spend $500 for a bigfoot hoax, but someone else would set up an elaborate set costing hundreds of thousands of dollars to fake a moon landing.

Consistency is not your strong suit, bOoB.

I looked at the link. I don't think the guy is stupid enough to think he would fool anybody with a Big Foot suit. The idea is too stupid. You are the only one who believes anything about this story. I still have an open mind. I have no conclusions yet dUMMy. You just aren't bright enough to figure that out yet. Sad about your brain.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-08-15 12:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, bOoB, you're saying "This guy has been proven to be full of shit before, and scammed people out of tens of thousands of dollars, on this exact same subject. Only YOU are stupid enough to believe he's full of shit again this time."

bOoB, I've asked you before.. come here with all the sane people. It's warm here, here in this place where we seek answers to questions. Come out of the lonely, cold, place full of kooks that start with a conclusion and allow that to blind them to common sense.

If someone scammed before, and stole thousands of dollars in the process; common sense tells us that they would, in fact, try the same scam again.

Oh and I AM willing to stand up and say "If this is Bigfoot, I am stupid."

Because I know it isn't.

Is this Big Foot story real or is it Bullshit?

I'm not falling into you one way trap of only you asking questions, bOoB. It's quid pro quo with me, remember?

Answer my question 12:25 first. For an added chuckle you can ammend it with your mantra, "I always answer questions directed to me". LOL

but someone else would set up an elaborate set costing hundreds of thousands of dollars to fake a moon landing.

Consistency is not your strong suit, bOoB.

Posted by goatman at 2008-08-15 12:28 PM | Reply

The FACT that someone spent hundreds of thousands of dollars setting up a fake moon landing is not in question. The simple FACT is that someone DID set up an elaborate moon landing site costing hundreds of thousands of dollars identical to the real moon landing site down to the rocks in the background, the shadows, and the shape of the ladder.

...come here with all the sane people.

Can he still take the bus to get the 4 o'clock special at Denny's?

If someone scammed before, and stole thousands of dollars in the process; common sense tells us that they would, in fact, try the same scam again.

Yeah, you know it's like Buzz Aldrin and Edgar Mitchell telling one of the biggest lies ever told -- that they went to the moon and da bOoB doesn't believe them. But he believes these liars when they say they saw aliens.

To modify George Orwell's pig character from "Animal Farm":

"All lies and liars are equal, but some lies are more equal than others"

How about YOU Buffalo Bob? You never take a stand on anything,like the limp wristed punk you have proven yourself to be.
Stand up
Be counted.
Be a man for once.
Is this Big Foot story real or is it Bullshit?

I for one will make a stand a say it's a hoax - I'm 100% sure of that.

(And before you try to dodge, note that this is your exact post to goatman - if you don't answer, YOU are the "limp wristed punk". Have a nice day!)

OK, bOoB -- I'll modify my question: If it is proven a hoax you will, out of the spirit of fairness and equity, admit that you are 85% stupid, right?

Posted by goatman at 2008-08-15 12:25 PM | Reply

No. Wrong. It would mean I am more open to new ideas than most.

Now answer the question.

Stand up.

Be a man.

Just once take a stand on something.

Look at Soheifox---even it took a stand.

Is this Big Foot story real or is it Bullshit?

;-)

Bob,
Take this test. Post the results and it will allay all doubts I have pertaining to your sanity.

...that they went to the moon and da bOoB doesn't believe them...
Posted by goatman

I think it's hilarious that Bob thinks we've orbited the moon (the smokestacks had to be viewed somehow!) but doesn't think we could have descended the, what, 20 nautical miles from the orbit to the surface. Yep, we ALMOST got there, but didn't quite make it...

Bartimus

I have already answered. To use Goatmans way of answering--scroll up. I would accept Goatmans answer in percentage also. I just say he NEVER takes a stand on ANYTHING controversial.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-08-15 12:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

Holy crap bOoB! That video has been debunked so thoroughly that it's hilarious.

Look at Soheifox---even it took a stand.

You didn't answer my question, but you don't need to. Your posts speak for themselves.

I'm with soheifox on this one. In fact, I'll probably beat him to the top of the bell tower to proclaim my ignorance if this is proven to be bigfoot.

Too bad you won't proclaim yours (well, 85%) when it is proven to be a hoax. Tell me again about being a man, bOoB? LOL

I think it's hilarious that Bob thinks we've orbited the moon (the smokestacks had to be viewed somehow!) but doesn't think we could have descended the, what, 20 nautical miles from the orbit to the surface. Yep, we ALMOST got there, but didn't quite make it...

Posted by bartimus at 2008-08-15 12:41 PM

That last 20 miles isn't so easy.

What did you think of the fake moon landing video I posted? What was their motivation for building that set? Why would anyone build a set like that and not have it shown to the public for 40 years? If it was someone trying to discredit the moon landings--why not release the tapes 40 years ago when they would have been more effective?

You didn't answer my question, but you don't need to. Your posts speak for themselves.

Posted by goatman at 2008-08-15 12:47 PM | Reply | Flag

Try reading--it's fundamental.

No. Wrong. It would mean I am more open to new ideas than most.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-08-15 12:40 PM | Reply

That video has been debunked so thoroughly that it's hilarious.

Well, Bob has yelled at the dumpster behind his local liquor store for so long, he's changed it's mind. It told him so.

No. Wrong. It would mean I am more open to new ideas than most.

I did read it, bOoB. That's what I meant that your posts speak for themselves. Here, you are too dense to get it so I'll expound for you:

You post is saying, "I expect goatman et al to proclaim their ignorance if this is proven to be bigfoot. However, if it's not, I do not have to do the same. All I have to do is claim to have an open mind".

Get it yet, dodo? For you, it's not only two countries, it's two playing fields.

Anyway, you bore me. I'm off to look for intelligent life. You've none to offer

Is this Big Foot story real or is it Bullshit?

It seems very hokey to me on multiple levels.

From the pictures to the way in which these guys are going about this. Add in the fact that this little scam has been pulled before, and my prediction on this is "bullshit".

Regardless, no correct answer to your question is possible because we don't have enough to go on. Until this corpse gets turned over to science for an appropriate examination, all we can do is guess.

What was their motivation for building that set?
Because NASA builds copies of EVERYTHING, from mockups of the Apollo capsules to the ISS. They may have built the set to simulate a moon landing - you know to give Armstrong a glimpse of what they thought it'd be like when he landed? Currently NASA has a mockup of the planet Mars, simply to see how humans and robots react to the Mars surface. They also film EVERYTHING, which I believe is NASA policy.

Why would anyone build a set like that and not have it shown to the public for 40 years?
Have you seen all the classified crap that NASA builds? They probably didn't show it because they were worried that the Ruskies might glean some little piece of intel from the video (don't ask me what, but I think we'd agree the gov't is somewhat anal retentive about classifications!)

Anyways, I did see your "85% belief" stand. I just think that a guy who is a proven hoaxster being in the center of this makes it seem so much more like a hoax.

I'm off to watch the new Star Wars with the wife. Jedi costumes, the whole 9 yards.

Difference between a Star Wars convention and a Bigfoot convention? We're kidding when we say we believe in aliens from outer space.

Holy crap bOoB! That video has been debunked so thoroughly that it's hilarious.

Posted by soheifox at 2008-08-15 12:43 PM | Reply

I looked at your links. I missed the "debunking" part. Maybe you can fill me in on my poor reading skills.

Who made that clip, and why?

The answers to those questions debunks the video. Your link just says it wasn't made by NASA. You did read your link didn't you?

;-)

Hey, B-Bob. I copied the image from the web page and did some enhancements to help determine what the pic is. Pretty crappy quality, as is typical with bigfoot pics.

It's definitely not bigfoot.

It looks like they got your mom, Bob.

Has anybody contacted you concerning a ransom?

BuffaloBob and JeffJ

Both of you seem to have an open mind on Big Foot's existence. I will too until this Georgia find has been proven to be a hoax.

fyi - On tonight's Coast-To-Coast w/George Noury (formerly the old Art Bell show) --

The first hour of tonight's show is dedicated to this Big Foot finding in Georgia. (The show repeats twice overnight in case you missed the first hour.)

Click on the right hand side of the link on the name "Lauren Coleman (a cryptozoologist) who is the featured guest.

Either you are very stupid, or they are--we'll find out soon enough.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob

We'll find out at 3 o'clock EDT. My quote was fromanother bigfoot "research" group BFRO.net, Bob. don't blame me if the believers don't believe somebody who got caught committing a fraud.

And I checked the drudgereport site, unless Bf is launching missiles, there's no new pictures, except the suit in the cooler.

Bob, everybody knows Bigfoot took the last UFO to Zyrkoni 345 with Elvis, anyways...

MOON LANDING IS A HOAX
that stupid story still around, that was a "Flat Earth Society" recruiting tool, is that when you joined 'em Buffalo Bob?

LeeAtwater -

Bob,

Take this test. Post the results and it will allay all doubts I have pertaining to your sanity.

www.quizrocket.com

I missed four of the quiz answers. Well, first thing in the morning before coffee isn't the best time for me to take a quiz but it was fun anyway. Still don't see why 1908 pennies adjusted for inflation are not more valuable today than the other pennies minted later. I realize many were trick questions and you had to think about a few of them. The quiz only tells which ones you got wrong -- it doesn't give the correct answers. How are you suppose to know?

Two of the answers I got wrong pertained to the following:

What was the correct answer for the question about measuring the cubic feet?

Also, I also thought the House Leader was third in line for the Presidency. I seem to remember a big deal being made about that issue when Pelosi was selected Speaker of the House.

What was their motivation for building that set?

Because NASA builds copies of EVERYTHING, from mockups of the Apollo capsules to the ISS. They may have built the set to simulate a moon landing - you know to give Armstrong a glimpse of what they thought it'd be like when he landed? Currently NASA has a mockup of the planet Mars, simply to see how humans and robots react to the Mars surface. They also film EVERYTHING, which I believe is NASA policy.

First, Soheifoxs link says NASA didn't do it. Second--how did they get the exact angle on the hill, the rock in the background, and the shadows from the lighting all correct before they got there? If it was to give Armstong a glimpse--why not have Armstrong on that ladder? That seems to be an elaborate and expensive glimpse. If the video was made after the fact--why was it made?

Why would anyone build a set like that and not have it shown to the public for 40 years?

Have you seen all the classified crap that NASA builds? They probably didn't show it because they were worried that the Ruskies might glean some little piece of intel from the video (don't ask me what, but I think we'd agree the gov't is somewhat anal retentive about classifications!)

It still doesn't explain the origins of this tape. Who made it and why. I don't buy your simulation theory without Armstong being there and the background being too close to the real thing before they went. This had to have been made after the event for the backgound to be accurate.

Anyways, I did see your "85% belief" stand. I just think that a guy who is a proven hoaxster being in the center of this makes it seem so much more like a hoax.

You may be correct--but his statements seem too strong and easily disproven if not the truth. His proof date is supposedly today---not too much time to milk it for money if false. He has also invited journalists to examine the carcass. I think even I could tell a carcass from a Big Foot suit. With it being that easy to disprove his statements--I lean towards his statements being true. Remember--even in the story of the Boy Who Cried Wolf--in the end--there was a wolf.

Posted by bartimus at 2008-08-15 01:00 PM |

Regarding sasquatch.....

Setting aside the hoaxters, pranksters and general wackiness of some of the more rabid believers (I know, that's a lot to set aside) I don't see why this notion is so deserving of mockery.

Is the prospect of a small population of intelligent, ape-like creatures inhabiting vast, largely unexplored tracts of land really that outlandish and unrealistic?

Weren't gorillas discovered in Asia within the last 50 years? How is that recent discovery so different than possibly discovering the irrefutible proof of the existence of sasquatch?

Compelling evidence:

bOoB: Why don't you just save yourself some time and keystrokes and type:

"I am a gullible idiot"

instead of your pagefuls of drivel that no one believes or reads anyhow.

It would be easier for you and you would have more time to do something constructive like taking a remedial physics or math course.

Just a suggestion

The truth is outed there:

Christopher Walken has fessed up:
So they found the body of Bigfoot in a freezer. Let that be a lesson to all you mythological creatures. When you borrow money from me, I expect it back.

Last month Bigfoot comes up to me. He says hes having a slow month, could I help? I say, What do you need? You want to meet with some producers? Talk to my agent? Work on my house?-- I got gutters you wouldnt believe.

He says, I need $100,000 dollars--. Wont tell me whats its for. I should have seen the warning signs. Hes on smack. But, for the kids, I give him the money. He promises two weeks.

So two weeks go by, wouldnt you know, no Bigfoot. His cellphone goes straight to voicemail, my emails get bounced back, real high school crap. I go looking for him, no address. I track him down to Georgia, the locals say he doesnt exist. This guy knows how to welch.

So finally I corner him in a Taco Bell on Route 6. Hes working beans. I say, Bigfoot, what are you doing here? You got $100,000 of my money.-- He gives me this sob story about a unicorn and a development deal. Im not listening. Im looking at the track marks in his fur.

I say, This is serious.--He says, What are you gonna do, bitch? Im 7 feet, 7 inches tall.--

Ill spare you the ugly details but suffice to say, nobodys going to be talking any more blurry photos of this guy.

Im not proud of my actions. I dont like leaning on creatures of folklore. But Im a businessman. I cant make exceptions.

See you tomorrow, griffin.

Efforts to reach Whitton and Dyer early Friday on their Bigfoot Tipline were unsuccessful. The voice mail recording says they have expanded their search to look for leprechauns and the Loch Ness monster. They also offer weekend expeditions to search for Bigfoot in the north Georgia mountains for $499.

In August, Tom Biscardi, head of a group called Searching for Bigfoot, joined the men.

Other Bigfoot hunters call Biscardi a huckster, a Las Vegas promoter and a scam artist looking for media attention he's gained since he began his search for Bigfoot three to four years ago. He released a photograph and announced the news conference earlier this week, drawing national attention.

Whitton and Dyer promise to tell the story of how they found the corpse at the news conference. They have offered three different tales so far:

* In early videos, the animal was shot by a former felon, and the men followed it into the woods.
* In a second version, they found a "family of Bigfoot" in North Georgia mountains.
* In the third, the two were hiking and stumbled upon the corpse with open wounds.

Let's take up a collection. The money will go towards an all expenses paid trip to visit BuffaloBob.
The lucky winner, chosen at random, will be required to spend 1 hour minimum interviewing Bob on tape. He will also be required to take Bob to the early-bird special at Denny's and then heckle a road sign.

Whatever money is left over is the winners to keep.

I have doubts Bob exists.

"""Is the prospect of a small population of intelligent, ape-like creatures inhabiting vast, largely unexplored tracts of land really that outlandish and unrealistic?"""

Outlandish, yes. Impossible? No. But the same could be said about many unexplained phenomenons. UFOs, loch ness, ghosts, etc.

"""Weren't gorillas discovered in Asia within the last 50 years? """

Yes, a whole lot of animals from a previously documented species Vs. an entirely new type of animal. Seems to me that for all of the sightings, prints, remains, etc. that have been reported over the years, one of these elements would have been conclusive.

Can I claim that it's impossible? No. But as time moves on, it becomes less likely.

* In early videos, the animal was shot by a former felon, and the men followed it into the woods.
* In a second version, they found a "family of Bigfoot" in North Georgia mountains.
* In the third, the two were hiking and stumbled upon the corpse with open wounds.

yeah, like the CIA can't manipulate time and space to create multiple parallel dimensions, where different things can occur at the same time.

Bob

###

This thing probably exists and was probably drinking and hunting with dick Cheney. Expect to find an apology from it fro messing up his shot somewhere.

Yes, a whole lot of animals from a previously documented species Vs. an entirely new type of animal.

But whole new species of animals are discovered all of the time. Some seriously bizarre creatures thriving around those oceanic, volcanic vents, for example.

If these things do exist, sooner or later man will stumble upon irrefutible proof.

Look how long it took man to garner a single snapshot of a giant squid in its natural habitat.

He will also be required to take Bob to the early-bird special at Denny's

If it wasn't for the danger of running in to John McSame panhandling, I'd take you up on the offer.

If it wasn't for the danger of running in to John McSame panhandling, I'd take you up on the offer.

Posted by northguy3 at 2008-08-15 01:42 PM | Reply

With his wife's money he can afford to eat at The Original Pancake House.

This video is arguably the most compelling evidence currently available.

If these things do exist, sooner or later man will stumble upon irrefutible proof.

Posted by JeffJ at 2008-08-15 01:42 PM | Reply

Jeff,
I don't think there's any possible way they exist. Somebody would have stumbled across one. Somebody would find a dead one or a den. A grizzly would have mauled one. A rabid one would have attacked humans. There are just endless opportunities to have had already found one.

Comparing that to a giant squid that lives in the deepest reaches of the sea is a little disingenuous. The sea is much more expansive and much less traveled compared to forests in the US.

"Let's take up a collection. The money will go towards an all expenses paid trip to visit BuffaloBob.
The lucky winner, chosen at random, will be required to spend 1 hour minimum interviewing Bob on tape. He will also be required to take Bob to the early-bird special at Denny's and then heckle a road sign.

Whatever money is left over is the winners to keep.

I have doubts Bob exists."

Why not have the winner take Bob down to Georgia to hunt bigfoots? I'm sure two adult humans armed with car antennas could easily bring one down.

Chair,

I hear what you are saying.

However, I've seen this Patterson video I linked scientifically scrutinized to the nth degree.

The fact that on one frame the creature opens its as it is turning, gave me pause - pretty hard to do with a mask.

The fact that a well-conditioned athlete was unable to mimic this things movements gave me big time pause.

Also, countless eyewitness accounts and chance encounters DO exist - sure, they don't constitute proof, but it's not as if a lot of different people haven't claimed an encounter. Are they ALL lying? It's possible, I suppose.

Manypaths claims to have tracked one of these on an indian reservation. He wouldn't go so far as to call it for what it seemed, he didn't have enough proof for that. Howover, his description of the foot impressions - their size, spacing etc. was pretty interesting.

Ultimately, skepticism is the only intellectually healthy approach until incontorvertible proof does surface.

Time will ultimately tell.

But whole new species of animals are discovered all of the time. Some seriously bizarre creatures thriving around those oceanic, volcanic vents, for example.

C'mon, Jeff. Do you really think it is as likely to find a new 300 pound species in Georgia as it is to find a new species of worm 3 miles below ocean's surface?

Interview him? Hell I'd give Bob his own SHOW on Town Park Radio. Even whip him up a nice theme song with clips overrunning from Men in Black, the clips form the moon landing, and, of course, "IT PUTS THE LOTION ON IT'S SKIN OR IT GETS THE HOSE AGAIN!"

Goat,

Again, I hear what you are saying and I fully admit that your collective skepticism is more reasonable than my belief that these things are real based upon the amassed evidence and testimonies.

LOL, I chuckle everytime I think of da bOoB (thanks Goatman) posting:

I'd rather have a car antennae than a gun in that situation. Even a rock or a club.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob

Jeff, one criticism in the comments section on that youtube video, that kinda made sense, was that the glutes weren't moving as he was walking. That would imply to me the real glutes doing the work were covered by some sort of costume.

"The fact that on one frame the creature opens its as it is turning, gave me pause - pretty hard to do with a mask."

Probably not if you have a really good mask. You can do anything with enough money, Jeff. Including manipulation of a video.

It doesnt even have to be a mask at all. They could have glued a bunch of shit to the guy's face so that it moved like a real face.

Those animals around those vents proved to be an entirely unknown Kingdom of life. Hardly trivial.

More than once hairs have been found whose DNA relates to an unknwon primate. But maybe it's all just monkeys. Very mysterious monkeys.

"Including manipulate a video...."

The Patterson-Gimlin film is the most analyzed piece of cinmea other than the Zapruder footage. To date (forty years), no one's demonstrated it is ought what it seems to be.

I don't hail this video as foolproof.

When the original film went under a miscroscope and was analyzed frame by frame, no seams, stitching, etc. could be found indicating a costume. However, the film was also too grainy to reveal any definitive musculature, glute-movement, etc.

It could very well be a hoax, but if so, it is extremely well done. The creature's movements are definitely not man-like.

Zed,

I don't think the Patterson footage will ever alleviate doubt or be proven as a hoax. The image quality just isn't good enough (either way) to stand up to scrutiny given our current level of technology in this arena.

"But if so, exremely well done...."

More than that, Jeff---Brilliantly done. As someone has noted, the film holds up under methodds of scientific examination unknown in 1967.

"The creature's movements are definitely not man-like."

But they are movements that any human could easily do. All he is doing is bobbing up and down slightly as he walks, and swinging his arms more than a person normally would.

And how would you ever find seams or stitching in a video that grainy? It's impossible. And like I said, gluing the hair to a human body would eliminate the need for that.

Joe,

But they are movements that any human could easily do.

First, all of the creatures movements were digitized and then a scientific team had a well-conditioned athlete attempt to mimic the creature's gait and movements - he had all sorts of censors attached to his body. Long story short, he was unable to mimic the creature's movements.

These scientists would coach this guy regarding his positioning until it matched the positioning of that of the digitized creature. He did this frame-by frame. You could tell it was very awkward, and this guy was wearing shorts and a wife-beater, not a big, cumbersome gibbon suit.

My point being, these are not movements that any human can easily do.

As someone has noted, the film holds up under methodds of scientific examination unknown in 1967.

That was me, earlier in this thread.

My point being, these are not movements that any human can easily do.

Posted by JeffJ at 2008-08-15 02:20 PM | Reply

Nobody can dance like Michael Jackson either. I don't care how many scientists you have coaching Kobe Bryant, he's not moonwalking.

Anyone else remember this?

I don't care how many scientists you have coaching Kobe Bryant, he's not moonwalking.

A lot of people can emulate the moonwalk.

You raise a fair point and I am not suggesting that the fact that this athlete couldn't mimic the creature's movements means that this video is irrefutible proof of this thing's existence.

You probably find this shit to be a bit boring, but I wish you had actually seen the docmentary I am talking about. It was fascinating to watch.

"a scientific team had a well-conditioned athlete attempt to mimic the creature's gait and movements"

Okay. So maybe not "any" human could do them. All that proves is that one guy couldn't do it.

Great link, Sully.

Does anyone remember that episode of The Million Dollar Man where Steve Austin befriended a sasquatch?

Jeff,
I saw it. I thought it was on Monster Quest. Regardless, I've seen what you are talking about (Histories Mysteries?).

I watch that shit because it's interesting. I always laugh when the 4 or 5 guys go out to the woods to investigate it. They never fucking bring beer or liquor. Unless they're smoking mass quantities of herb, they've got seriosu fucking issues to hit the woods without any goodies.

All that proves is that one guy couldn't do it.

That one guy was a very limber, physically fit guy who was not hampered by a bulky gorilla suit.

It's not as if they were coaching LarryMohr and he lacked the athleticism to mimic the movements.

Does anyone remember the episode of The Facts of Life where they stored Jelly Beans in a bong?
Mrs Garret is fucking hot.

-Does anyone remember that episode of The Million Dollar Man where Steve Austin befriended a sasquatch?

"That's no Sasquatch, that's my wife!"- Henny Youngfoot

Chair,

It was Monsterquest.

I completely agree regarding those dudes not packing beer and that has always been my first thought as well - who in the hell goes camping in the middle of the woods without a few cases of beer?!?

Jeff:

"Your wife's a bigfoot, isn't she." - Eddie Murphy

I posted this shit yesterday...

Oliver,

The guy in your link is one of about 10 different guys who claim to have been wearing the alleged monkey suit.

All of these supposed actors add fuel to the fire, but just as the film isn't incontrovertible proof of this thing's existence, the testimonies of the 10-or-so individuals isn't proof that it's a hoax either.

I'd rather have a car antennae than a gun in that situation. Even a rock or a club.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-08-15 02:02 PM | Reply

What situation do you think I was talking about? Do you think guns are good for all situations? How about getting reception on a car radio? Which would you rather have in that situation? A car antennae or a gun? I think the rock or the club would be as effective at giving the radio a good whack to see if it worked, as the gun. Is that the situation you were talking about?

BBob,

The context of your original comment had zilch to do with radio reception.

You were pooh-poohing the effectiveness of a gun as a weapon of defense and said you'd prefer an antenna or a rock.

If you had said that you prefer an antenna to a gun when trying to tune your radio, nobody would be mocking you.

What situation do you think I was talking about?
Posted by Buffalo_Bob

It was a few months ago but I think you were talking about going up against a ninja. I think...

Actually, now I can't remeber if ninjas came into the conversation before or after the antenna comment. Regardless, the "car antenna" quote is just the newest part of DR folklore!

*remember

Bob was talking about fighting Zorro. That's where the car antenna came in.

The context of your original comment had zilch to do with radio reception.

You were pooh-poohing the effectiveness of a gun as a weapon of defense and said you'd prefer an antenna or a rock.

If you had said that you prefer an antenna to a gun when trying to tune your radio, nobody would be mocking you.

Posted by JeffJ at 2008-08-15 02:39 PM |

I still stand by my original statement. My point is---what was it. Do you know?

I like this video predominantly due to the backdrop music - "Cirrus Mino" by Pink Floyd

this story was the main story in WorldNetDaily, you know, the right wing christian rag, the one that referred to "Tyson Gay" as "Tyson Homosexual", what a great news source!

Last month, two men in the United States, Matthew Whitton and Rick Dyer, said they had discovered the body of a Bigfoot-like creature in the southern state of Georgia.

They posted a photo of their find on the Internet and even had a scientist fly in from interstate to examine the corpse.

Dr Paul Van Buren told the pair in an interview published online, that he had never seen anything like it before.

(Extract from Internet interview)

PAUL VAN BUREN: I don't even know what to say, you know. I've been all over the world studying primates and I don't even know what category this thing falls into. I mean, it's obviously a male, we looked at a very, very large primate male. It doesn't fit into any of the taxonomic groups that I can think of. Unbelievable.

JESSE LEARY: But the pair have since admitted that their scientist was fake, and none other than Matthew Whitton's brother, Martin.

I will gladly give you a knife and take out your eyes with a car antennae then whip you till you cry like a little girl. You can walk down the street with a car antennae and the cops won't stop you.
--Bluffalo_Jubblies

All I know is that freezer looks suspicious. Did anyone notice the orange reflection?

Jeff J

Let's go over it again.

Scenario one:

You are the good guy. Let's say you are walking down the street, and you have a permit for a gun and you have any type gun you want on your person.

Question: Where are you carrying your gun?

Scenario two:

You are the bad guy. You have to take the money off the good guy or serious consequences will happen in your life. Unfortunately all you have is a knife. You can not walk away--you must attack.

Question: How do you attack?

"That one guy was a very limber, physically fit guy who was not hampered by a bulky gorilla suit."

Maybe he should have been.

Maybe the person in the video wasn't physically fit at all, so someone who was fit was less able to replicate his movements.

My point is, the fact that one person with one body type couldn't replicate the movements does not prove anything, other than the fact that that person can't do it. You act as though this study had great methodology, but a far better way to do it would have been to have 50 different people come in and try to replicate the movements.

"Does anyone remember that episode of The Million Dollar Man where Steve Austin befriended a sasquatch?"

Vaguely.

"Does anyone remember the episode of The Facts of Life where they stored Jelly Beans in a bong?
Mrs Garret is fucking hot."

Yes. That was a classic. Not as good as the special episode of Different Strokes where Dudley almost gets molested but good nontheless.

And Jeff - I watch all those shows too. From the old "In Search of..." with Leonard Nemoy to Monster Quest. I just have a hard time believing in bigfoot for the reasons 101 stated early. I just think we would have found a dead one or at least some bones by now if it existed. I hope I'm wrong. That's part of the reason I keep watching these shows, I think.

Question: Where are you carrying your gun?
Posted by Buffalo_Bob

Right next to my car antenna in my pocket?

That is, if I have a Concealed Antenna Permit, of course...

I will gladly give you a knife and take out your eyes with a car antennae then whip you till you cry like a little girl. You can walk down the street with a car antennae and the cops won't stop you.
--Bluffalo_Jubblies

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-08-15 02:44 PM | Reply

And the inaccuracy of that statement is? A car antennae is a nasty little weapon, but not very durable--however it will do every thing I said in that post.

Question: Where are you carrying your gun?
Posted by Buffalo_Bob

Right next to my car antenna in my pocket?

Posted by bartimus at 2008-08-15 02:54 PM | Reply

That's why I'm talking to Jeff J. He's usually wrong, but at least he's coherent.

"I will gladly give you a knife and take out your eyes with a car antennae then whip you till you cry like a little girl. You can walk down the street with a car antennae and the cops won't stop you."

But what if you are fighting a dude who has a knife and set of goggles?

Sully

What if I was fighting Godzilla and Godzilla had a bazooka?

What if you're fighting a dude who has a windshield with the antennae built in?

Below is the original thread with the very first car antenna quote made by BuffaloBob. Some of you are taking it out of context .

"Grand Jury Clears Texan Who Killed Burglars

Guy pulls a gun first--takes your gun.

I would say any criminal that tries to hold someone up with a knife is a fool, but if he has a knife and you make a move, you could be sliced pretty bad and there's no guarantee you shoot him or don't have the gun used on you. No guarantee the bullet won't go through him and kill someone else.

I'd rather have a car antennae than a gun in that situation. Even a rock or a club.

Thinking you will be the only one with a gun is wishful thinking.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 12:40 PM | Reply

I am torn about this news (and awaiting something on the 3 EDT press conf), I would like to think that it is true and there really is a big foot, on the other hand I hope it isn't otherwise there will be a bunch of idiots with guns going out hunting for them. I would hope that if this turns out to be true that the powers that be enact emergency legislation to protect the creatures and make harming one a felony. But then, you know me I'm a tree hugger of the first order.

That's why I'm talking to Jeff J. He's usually wrong, but at least he's coherent.

----

It's a valid point. Where are you going to carry a car antenna?

Bigfoot in nothern Gerogia?

I'm guessing it was an old Russian female Olympic athlete-turned soldier involved in the fighting.

Ohhhhh, you mean 'cracker georgia'. Sorry.

Califchris

I still stand by that for the reasons stated.

If you disagree, you can play the scenarios I outlined for Jeff J.

Scenario one:

You are the good guy. Let's say you are walking down the street, and you have a permit for a gun and you have any type gun you want on your person.

Question: Where are you carrying your gun?

Scenario two:

You are the bad guy. You have to take the money off the good guy or serious consequences will happen in your life. Unfortunately all you have is a knife. You can not walk away--you must get the money.

Question: How do you get the money?

I changed the last part from--You must attack--to--You must get the money.

Question: How do you get the money?

----

I sneak up, kill the guy, and take his money.

Where are you going to carry a car antenna?

Posted by Pirate at 2008-08-15 03:09 PM | Reply

There's nothing wrong with carrying a car antenna in your hand. There could be lots of legitimate reasons for carrying it around. Maybe you just found it. Maybe you just bought it and are carrying it home. Maybe you consider it a good luck piece. Nothing against the law about carrying a car antenna around.

I sneak up, kill the guy, and take his money.

Posted by Pirate at 2008-08-15 03:16 PM | Reply

Would you still kill him if you didn't see a gun?

And there's nothing against the law about carrying a golf club, baseball bat, broom, pepper spray, hammer, sliced onions, week old dirty diaper in your hands.

And there's nothing against the law about carrying a golf club, baseball bat, broom, pepper spray, hammer, sliced onions, week old dirty diaper in your hands.

Posted by Pirate at 2008-08-15 03:22 PM | Reply

All true. But would you still kill him if you didn't see a gun?

Would you still kill him if you didn't see a gun?

----

Given your scenario, yes.

That is, if I have a Concealed Antenna Permit,

Is that what they mean, "Pop a C.A.P. in someone's ass"?

Your scenario is "Saw" based. I cannot walk away so I have no choice but to try to get the money. If I don't get it, then serious consequences will happen to me. Now considering I'm the bad guy, I'm going to eliminate my only threat which is the good guy.

BuffaloBob

In your 3:14 p.m. scenario -- does the guy with the knife sneak up and grab me from behind in his attempt to rob me or does he come directly towards me -- face to face -- with his knife? Trying to figure out how much of an element of surprise I'd have to consider.

LilBrit

the Big Foot noon press conference you spoke of in your post -- what cable channel or network is it suppose to be on? I didn't see anything about it on CNN or the other cable channels which are ususally 24/7 news.

"What if I was fighting Godzilla and Godzilla had a bazooka?"

Godzilla can't operate a bazooka. His "hands" are too big and he lacks the requisite manual dexterity. I wouldn't recommend fighting Godzilla unless you had some kind of giant mecha Voltron or Mazinga and those dudes are bazooka proof.

Califchris

There are two scenarios

You are the good guy.

You are the bad guy.

How the bad guy attacks is up to you since you are the bad guy.

All true. But would you still kill him if you didn't see a gun?

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-08-15 03

Just because you don't see a gun when he attacks you doesn't mean his intent is not to kill you or that he's not carrying another easily hidden weapon like a knife.

Now if I'm the good guy with a concealed gun, I would give the guy my money and then as he starts to leave and has a few yards of distance, pull out my gun.

But in reality if I was the good guy, I would give the guy my money no matter what weapon I had. Potentially killing somebody or being killed would not be worth it unless the bad guy's intentions was to hurt me.

Cali-CNN is supposedly broadcsting it online now.

Just because you don't see a gun when he attacks you doesn't mean his intent is not to kill you or that he's not carrying another easily hidden weapon like a knife.

Posted by CalifChris at 2008-08-15 03:32 PM | Reply

True. But either way, you are dead, and the gun was not a factor.

Neither was the car antenna, baseball bat, etc...

How the bad guy attacks is up to you since you are the bad guy.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-08-15 03

Okay, if I'm the bad guy with a knife trying to rob someone I would sneak up from behind and grab them tight around the neck with my one arm and make sure they saw the knife I held in the hand of my other arm . I'd do it that way in order to intimidate and scare the victim enough into letting me rob them without them thinking of trying to fight me back. It also doesn't give the victim much of a chance to pull out his/her gun. Any criminal would want to have the element of surprise over his victim.

NG3

THANKS!!

Or pretend to ask for help so the good guy puts down the car antenna and then you pull the knife.

I'm serious. Somebody needs to meet Bob and report back. That guy is a fucking nut job.

Is there any doubt his antenna fascination comes from being beaten by his father using a "switch".

A week old dirty diaper is better than a car antenna.

Especially if there was a big blowout

But in reality if I was the good guy, I would give the guy my money no matter what weapon I had. Potentially killing somebody or being killed would not be worth it unless the bad guy's intentions was to hurt me.

Posted by Pirate at 2008-08-15 03:34 PM | Reply

I agree with your logic except that if I had a concealed gun and the bad guy was walking away with just a knife--I would pull the gun and take my money back.

But if I were the bad guy I would assume you had a concealed gun and searched you for it--and probably have taken your shoes too.

Some clowns in baseball caps talking and not providing anything of proof.

Couple of bullshit artists.

why the steadfastness in refusing to believe in God?

It isn't really based on the belief of God or not. It is his enormous disdain for other human beings that leads him to think he doesn't believe in God.

If someone came at me with a knife, I would tuck my chin and roll backwards, simultaneously releasing a flash bang and smoke grenade, thereby allowing me to escape unharmed and disorienting the attacker. I would then reach for my gun and attempt to shoot the car antenna out of Boob's hand.

But if I were the bad guy I would assume you had a concealed gun and searched you for it--and probably have taken your shoes too.

----

That's why you always have a booby trap for cases like that. The good guy will assume that the bad guy will assume that he has a concealed gun so he will set up a booby trap on his body.

I would then reach for my gun and attempt to shoot the car antenna out of Boob's hand.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

I'd come at him with an AM radio and ask him to hold the antenna up high over his head so I could get better reception. When he did, wham... right in the short ribs.

If someone came at me with a knife, I would tuck my chin and roll backwards, simultaneously releasing a flash bang and smoke grenade, thereby allowing me to escape unharmed and disorienting the attacker. I would then reach for my gun and attempt to shoot the car antenna out of Boob's hand.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-08-15 03:46 PM | Reply

I would elevate myself like David Blaine, and when I got out of knife range I would pull my antenna out and carve a "Zorro Z" on top of the bad guys dome.
It's not that I don't like your method, but what if you slept wrong the night before and had a stiff neck and stuff? The chin roll may not be so easy. Think about it. I'm just looking out for you bro.

I would pull the gun and take my money back.

no, you would ask for your money back and hope he obliges.

what if he doesn't? what are you prepared to do?

Lets make it interesting.....we will assume the bad guy is conservative.

I'd just scream at the top of my lungs and then pretend to faint and hope he'll then just takes my $$$$ and runs without using his weapon on me. Once I knew he was gone I'd get up and call the cops.

p.s. if he also stole my credit cards or bank cards in the robbery first thing I'd do is make sure I canceled all of them.

I also doubt Bob exists. However, if they had a picture of him in a freezer with a beef jerky tongue hanging out of his mouth, I would be more inclined to believe, since the costume store doesn't have Buffalo Bob suits for rent.

"It's not that I don't like your method, but what if you slept wrong the night before and had a stiff neck and stuff? The chin roll may not be so easy. Think about it. I'm just looking out for you bro."

Posted by 101Chairborne

Very good point.

I appreciate the concern.

"Lets make it interesting.....we will assume the bad guy is conservative."

Well then, aiming for a heart or brain is pointless.

But then the bad guy will assume that the good guy has booby trapped his body because he assumed that the good guy assumed that he (the bad guy) will search his body for the concealed weapon and thus planted a booby trap.

So the bad guy won't search the good guy.

Even considering all the what ifs, unlikely scenarios, one-on-ones I'll take the gun over the car antennae, bOoB.

You have your weapon, I have mine. Wanna rumble?

if he also stole my credit cards or bank cards in the robbery first thing I'd do is make sure I canceled all of them.

Well, according to Danni, everyone's credit card is maxed and bank accounts are drained. So, naturally you would give those up.

If some guy came at me with a knife, the ideal weapon would be a handful of salt. As he lunges at me I would throw the salt in his eyes, blinding him (this is much easier to do than hit someone in the eyes with a car antenna which would require at least two swipes). Once the attacker is blinded, he is at my mercy. I could then either retreat or deliver the killing blow, depending on whether or not I was carrying a ball point pen.....

Well then, aiming for a heart or brain is pointless.

Posted by Danforth

okay, I'll give that a FF.

Salt? Good idea, Sully. Also easy to keep some in your hand on your way to your car
or walking back home in a dark area.

To clarify, are we talking fixed length antenna, or the more potent and outlawed in California telescoping type?

I'd rather have a car antennae than a gun in that situation. Even a rock or a club.

Thinking you will be the only one with a gun is wishful thinking.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 12:40 PM | Reply

Just don't use an antennae from a BMW--they are made of rubber.

this is much easier to do than hit someone in the eyes with a car antenna which would require at least two swipes

----

Yea but the bad guy assumed you would do this so he's wearing safety glasses.

there are a half dozen people outside my office wondering what in the hell I'm laughing at.

"Somebody needs to meet Bob and report back. That guy is a fucking nut job."

Doesn't he live near you?

why the steadfastness in refusing to believe in God?

Posted by OohRah at 2008-08-15 03:43 PM | Reply

I've said this many times. The stories of the bible are based on ancient stories. The ancient stories have been discarded as false. However, the stories of Genesis, Adam and Eve, the Flood, the Tower of Babel, ressurected gods, are all from these older stories. In addition--the older stories make far more sense. The older stories are much more beautiful than their pale biblical counterparts.

The older stories have more credibility than the bible. The biblical god is not something or a concept I would worship even if proven true.

The ancient stories were written by the scholars and most influential people of their time. The Sumerians were the first civilization with first schools, first kings, first mathematics, first astronomers, first after first after frst. They said everything they knew the gods told them. Only they didn't talk about the gods the way the greeks or even we do, as an abstract invisible being. They said their gods were there with them--in the flesh--living among them. No other religion has made such claims. I believe they were telling the truth. I think they were recording history.

Does anyone know where I can get that exposive/flash bang/smoke making device that ninjas throw on the ground right in front of themself before they disappear?

Do those things explode on contact with the ground, and if so, could I throw it at the bad guy and disappear him?

This thread has me considering my safety, and I want to be prepared.

"there are a half dozen people outside my office wondering what in the hell I'm laughing at."

Posted by eberly

I've gotten a couple curious looks myself.

Yea but the bad guy assumed you would do this so he's wearing safety glasses.

Posted by Pirate at 2008-08-15 03:58 PM

Not only that, the bad guy probably has a couple of his buddies with him.

Then what do you do???

what if he doesn't? what are you prepared to do?

Lets make it interesting.....we will assume the bad guy is conservative.

Posted by eberly at 2008-08-15 03:51 PM | Reply

I'd be prepared to fire a warning shot. If he ran I'd be prepared to shoot at his legs.

To clarify, are we talking fixed length antenna, or the more potent and outlawed in California telescoping type?

I was thinking of the huge CB antennas that have the spring so you can whip the shit out of someone.

Doesn't he live near you?

Posted by JOE at 2008-08-15 04:00 PM | Reply

Unfortunately no. He lives in Columbus, OH.

I remeber when Walt posted Bob's real name and address. Bob sent it to him in an offer to fight because he was calling Walt a Mercenary.
Walt thought it was hilarious and posted Bobs info.

Could you picture Bob, Celisary, and Redneckville sitting at a dinner table together?

"Do those things explode on contact with the ground, and if so, could I throw it at the bad guy and disappear him?"

Posted by 101Chairborne

Normally that would work.

But with the invention of invisibility cloaks, they're already disappeared. (all the criminals are using them nowadays)

This thread has me considering my safety, and I want to be prepared.

----

Just create a photoshopped giant picture of Rice and Reno topless in thongs with Rosanne Barr and Rosie naked and wet. That make the thief take out his own eyes with the car antenna.

The much-anticipated Bigfoot press conference in Palo Alto, Calif., Friday afternoon didn't reveal much about the seven-foot body two Georgia men claimed they found in the woods last month.

"We want to talk to Tom Biscardi," self-styled Sasquatch seeker Tom Biscardi recounted Matthew Whitton and Rick Dyer as telling him. "They didn't want to meet anyone else."

Biscardi reiterated his invitation to FOX News Channel anchor Megyn Kelly to come to Georgia and view the body, and plugged his Internet radio show.

He said there wouldn't be anything revealed Friday except for more photographs of the creature, but promised that he would "assemble" a group of scientists to examine the corpse.

Do those things explode on contact with the ground, and if so, could I throw it at the bad guy and disappear him?

with the crowd that posts here I'm sure someone will come along and direct you where to go to get one of those things.

Not only that, the bad guy probably has a couple of his buddies with him.

Then what do you do???

----

Find Bigfoot?

Find Bigfoot?

Good idea. Last I heard he was in Georgia.

NG3

Check out the link in my 1:13 pm above.

Maybe we can learn more about the Bigfoot find tonight on Coast-to-Coast.

I gave you people some scenarios--all I see is buried ostrich heads around here.

Facts are if a guy with a knife wants your money, he's going to move when you are not prepared to resist. As Pirate says--if he wants, he just sneaks up behind you and kills you. Or like I said, he sticks the knife in your back as a warning and takes your gun--pats you down for hidden weapons, takes your money and your shoes. Your gun is no good for defense. Your gun is an enticement since he knows he can get good money for it.

Could you picture Bob, Celisary, and Redneckville sitting at a dinner table together?

Posted by 101Chairborne

At the Bellview nut house? Sure.

"Or like I said, he sticks the knife in your back as a warning and takes your gun--pats you down for hidden weapons, takes your money and your shoes."

How does holding a car antenna prevent anyone from sticking a knife in your back and taking it from you?

That's why I suggest screaming and then pretending to faint.
You may may lose your $$$$ but you'll most likely come out alive and uninjured. case closed

How does holding a car antenna prevent anyone from sticking a knife in your back and taking it from you?

It doesn't.

"How does holding a car antenna prevent anyone from sticking a knife in your back and taking it from you?"

You don't just hold it. You walk down the street screaming, spinning around and swinging that fucker wildly. Trust me, the dude with a knife is going to find an easier mark.

Of course, if the shit really hits the fan, your best bet is a curtain rod......

How does holding a car antenna prevent anyone from sticking a knife in your back and taking it from you?

Posted by JOE at 2008-08-15 04:14 PM | Reply |

It doesn't. It doesn't stop the guy from killing you outright either. However, if you had a car antenna in your hand rather than a gun on your hip, the guy is less likely to kill you outright, or take your gun and use it against you. Which would you rather the bad guy took from you--the car antenna or the gun? In addition, he MIGHT not take you as seriously with a car antenna as he would a gun, and he MIGHT give you some space. If you have a foot or so of space to move away, the car antenna would be very effective at keeping him at distance.

How does holding a car antenna prevent anyone from sticking a knife in your back and taking it from you?

Posted by JOE at 2008-08-15 04:14 PM | Reply

Well, the bad guy will see a person carrying a car antenna and think "That crazy old homeless fuck doesn't have any money!" and he'll move on to somebody else.
Basically holding a car antenna or wearing a really dirty coat while pushing a shopping cart full of junk will protect you equally.

I just went outside and took at detailed look at my
antenna. I'm still not sold.

Which would you rather the bad guy took from you--the car antenna or the gun?

Binary bOoB strikes again.

No one is taking anything from me if I have a gun. Just come at me with your antennae and try.

Basically holding a car antenna or wearing a really dirty coat while pushing a shopping cart full of junk will protect you equally.

Posted by 101Chairborne at 2008-08-15 04:25 PM | Reply

Very good point. I would rather have a shopping cart full of junk in that situation than a gun.

More stuff to throw at the guy with the gun...

"Basically holding a car antenna or wearing a really dirty coat while pushing a shopping cart full of junk will protect you equally."

I was once blacked out drunk in NYC and when I started to regain my senses I was horrifed to realize that I had somehow crossed the Hudson and was now in Jersey City (long story). I was dressed pretty shabily when I went I first went out but by this time the front of my sweatshirt and jeans had numerous stains from spilled drinks. When I realized that I looked like a whino, I felt much better about my chances of finding my way out of there without gettting mugged.

No one is taking anything from me if I have a gun. Just come at me with your antennae and try.

Posted by goatman at 2008-08-15 04:29 PM

WTF are you talking about? Quit huffing things.

Or you could break into a full speed run and aim your shopping cart directly at the
bad buy and send him flying head over heels.

More stuff to throw at the guy with the gun...

Posted by MURPHY at 2008-08-15 04:31 PM |

There is no guy with a gun. Only a guy with a knife. Pay attention. You sound like Goatman.

Or you could wear a helmet and pretend you're retarded. Why would anyone rob a retarded guy? And if they tried, you would have head protection in case they have a rock or a club.

I would rather have a shopping cart full of junk in that situation than a gun.

----

I'd rather have Jet Li. I don't care what the thief has at that point.

Maybe he has a retarded brother and confuses your defense with mocking.

Maybe he has a retarded brother and confuses your defense with mocking.

Posted by Pirate

Then you better hope to hell you have 2 antennaes

...damnit...

The solution is obvious. Just don't go out at all. Lock your doors, stay in your basement, and spend all your time online.

Wait a minute....

WTF are you talking about?

???

I'll try to make it simpler.

You: Antennae
Me: Gun
You, unable to deflect speeding bullet with antennae: dead

Understand? It ain't rocket science

"However, if you had a car antenna in your hand rather than a gun on your hip, the guy is less likely to kill you outright, or take your gun and use it against you."

Right - if you don't have a gun, he can't take a gun from you - because you don't have one. Great point Bob. But he could probably take a car antenna from you easier than he could take anything that is concealed, like a gun. Or are we to assume for purposes of your stupid example that robbers know where our guns are and are able to access them?

"Which would you rather the bad guy took from you--the car antenna or the gun?"

Bob, not everyone is a big enough pussy to decide on their weapon of choice based on what they would most want to have taken away from them and used on them. Unless you can show that it is statistically more likely for a gun to be taken from you than to be used properly by you yourself, that line of reasoning is flawed.

Joe

That was an entirely different line of reasoning with someone else. Let's start over with you.

You can play the scenarios I outlined for Jeff J.

Scenario one:

You are the good guy. Let's say you are walking down the street, and you have a permit for a gun and you have any type gun you want on your person.

Question: Where are you carrying your gun?

Scenario two:

You are the bad guy. You have to take the money off the good guy or serious consequences will happen in your life. Unfortunately all you have is a knife. You can not walk away--you must get the money.

Question: How do you get the money?

I don't care if you had to explain it to someone else. You refuse to acknowledge that most people dont choose their weapons based on what they would prefer to be stolen and used against them (i.e. the weakest one, like a car antenna).

My gun is probably in my jacket. I get the money by showing the person the knife and demanding their money.

You don't go to war with the car antenna you want, you go to war with the antenna you have.

Chuck Norris uses an antenna for self defense, but he leaves it attached to the truck.

Question: Where are you carrying your gun?

Probably would be in my purse. Seriously.

I'm sure not going to be wearing my gun in a holster like some crazed Annie Oakley walking the streets.

Question: Where are you carrying your gun?

----

Mine will be like the laser in Predator. Mounted to my shoulder and controlled by a computer mask.

Pirate, scenario 3: your attacker is coming at you with a knife and is covered with mud (so the IR doesn't work). Now you're screwed.

Joe

I don't refuse to acknowledge anything. You refuse to understand that the scenario is a given. This is a closed discussion about a statement I made about a specific situation in which I would rather have a car antenna or a gun. The weapons in this scenario are not optional. The attacker has a knife, and the defender has either a gun or a car antenna.

Now if you would like to participate in the discussion about the scenario, you can answer the questions.

No IR. Too buggy. It will be based on movement and proximity.

I did answer the questions. Try reading my post again.

Scenario 4: You are working behind the counter at a Dairy Queen. A customer who has a concealed gun orders a banana split without the pineapple syrup. You accidentally leave the pineapple syrup on. He becomes unruly. You grab a waffle cone and poke his eyes out before he can shoot you.

See? Waffle cones are always preferable to guns for self defense.

I'm sure not going to be wearing my gun in a holster like some crazed Annie Oakley walking the streets.

Posted by CalifChris at 2008-08-15 05:06 PM | Reply

That's one of the main problems with guns--they aren't easily accessable. If you can't get to it--you might as well not have it and the chance are your purse and gun will be stolen.

But you failed to answer the second scenario.

Joe

At what time did you answer the questions in my 4:56 post? I missed your answers.

Scenario 5: Buffalo Bob goes into a currency exchange to cash his (mental) disability check. A shifty man named Roscoe is standing behind him in line. Suddenly Roscoe demands $17.36 from Bob to get onto the next Greyhound bus out of town, and begins threatening Bob with a car antenna. Bob has a gun in his jacket, but realizing that he is defeated, he reluctantly surrenders the $17.36.

I answered the questions at the end of my 5:01 post.

"one of the main problems with guns--they aren't easily accessable."

Whereas you'll always be near your car antenna.

It probably wouldn't be very difficult to find Bob. Just drive around Columbus until you see the moron walking around with a car antenna in his hand. He'll always be outside, because no competent business owner would allow him in with his car antenna (unless it's the retractable kind that he could keep in his pocket, in which case it poses the same accessibility problems that supposedly plague the handgun).

No, you always carry it with in your hand.

Here bOoB, lemme spell it out for you again:

If the attacker has a knife, and gets the drop on me, what I have is completely irrelevant. He's going to take it away from me and sell it, or throw it away if it's an antenna. He's not going to magically get extra pissed because I'm carrying a gun and kill me.

If he FAILS to get the drop on me, I'd rather have a gun.

So either way, I'd rather have the gun. A car antenna will do nothing at all except piss a competent knife wielder off. You will be annoying him and pissing him off, and even leaving permanent scars, and he will be gutting you.

You're not going to hit his eyes. At best you'll get a cheekbone. Now if you have a GUN, then any hit you score will be effective.

But if you're going to carry something around all the time. It should be a cane or walking stick with a sword in it.

Cue Zat.

And what's the latest on the Bigfoot? It's... WAAYY the hell past 3 PM EST.

I'm out.

Now a walking stick gun...best of both worlds.

"Now a walking stick gun...best of both worlds."

Posted by Pirate

I get the money by showing the person the knife and demanding their money.

Posted by JOE at 2008-08-15 05:01 PM | Reply

So if you were the guy with the gun, and a guy came up to you and showed you his knife--would you just hand over your money?

Here bOoB, lemme spell it out for you again:

If the attacker has a knife, and gets the drop on me, what I have is completely irrelevant. He's going to take it away from me and sell it, or throw it away if it's an antenna. He's not going to magically get extra pissed because I'm carrying a gun and kill me.

Pirate said that's how he would get the money. I didn't say anything about the guy killing you or getting pissed because you had a gun. So you admit that the gun does you no good if the attacker gets the drop on you. Then the question remains:

Would you rather have a gun at that point or a car antenna? Me? I'd rather give the guy a car antenna. I don't like the idea of my gun in criminal hands. I don't know why you would rather give the bad guy a gun, but I guess you have your reasons.

If he FAILS to get the drop on me, I'd rather have a gun.

So either way, I'd rather have the gun. A car antenna will do nothing at all except piss a competent knife wielder off. You will be annoying him and pissing him off, and even leaving permanent scars, and he will be gutting you.

You're not going to hit his eyes. At best you'll get a cheekbone. Now if you have a GUN, then any hit you score will be effective.

I can assure you I would come close enough to his eyes to keep him away. At this point, the choice between a gun and a car antenna is personal choice. I would rather not risk missing him or the bullet going through him and killing or injuring someone else. I would rather not have the thought of killing someone. I would rather not risk lawsuits from wounding or killing him. Unless he's really determined to get me, the car antenna should make him move out. He wouldn't want to spend too much time and there is the definite possiblity of being marked for identification or losing an eye. But that again is just my opinion as to which I would rather have.
But I think the odds of the gun being taken are greater than my being able to use it if I become a target. I just won't be able to get it out and in effective use in time.

Now. You only answered the first part. Answer the second scenario.

Scenario two:

You are the bad guy. You have to take the money off the good guy with the gun or serious consequences will happen in your life. Unfortunately all you have is a knife. You can not walk away--you must get the money.

Question: How do you get the money?

Posted by soheifox at 2008-08-15 05:40 PM

BuffaloBob

But you failed to answer the second scenario.

No I didn't. I answered it awhile back. You just didn't bother to read it.

Okay, if I'm the bad guy with a knife trying to rob someone I would sneak up from behind and grab them tight around the neck with my one arm and make sure they saw the knife I held in the hand of my other arm . I'd do it that way in order to intimidate and scare the victim enough into letting me rob them without them thinking of trying to fight me back. It also doesn't give the victim much of a chance to pull out his/her gun. Any criminal would want to have the element of surprise over his victim.

Posted by CalifChris at 2008-08-15 03:38 PM

In other words, don't bring a gun to a antenna fight.

bOoB, you are going to go to a big city one day, and you are going to die there. You are a fool. Even in scenarios of LIFE AND DEATH you start with a conclusion, and try to bend the situation to fit the conclusion you started from. You throw in a million "what if" because you can't listen to what anyone tells you. You seriously stated:

"I can assure you I would come close enough to his eyes to keep him away."

bOoB, you are not a fucking ninja. If you had the skill necessary to do that, you would not be wasting your life on a message board. You would be in the Special Forces. Not to mention the kind of people who DO have the skill for that have written manuals that list a car antenna as a "oneshot distraction". That means you can go ahead and take a car antenna against some guy with a knife. You will be annoying him, while he will be GUTTING YOU.

And would you like one of these kick ass manuals I tell you about, with the super secret fighting techniques perfected by Green Berets and Navy SEAL??

Hitchhike your ass down to the army surplus store and get a hand to hand manual. Should run you about 30 bucks.

The late Bob, the man who brought a car antenna to a gunfight. Alas. Alack. We knew him well. Foolhardy soul.

Then a legion of "Bigfeet" emerged and joined the fray, seeking vengeance in the virtual world, since the destruction of "True Believer Bob" also destroyed them as they were figments of his imagination.

Requiescat in pacem.

Alas poor Bob. A man of valor. A man unafraid to confront and fight against the better armed foe. Bob stalwartly engaging his enemies in combat, continuing valiantly to his last breath. Commemorative efforts have begun and both GM and Toyota are naming car antennas after this international hero. The hills resoud the cry. For Bob, it was do or die. Listen to Bob's last recorded words. "Ughh. Arghh."

With the demise of Bob, urban guerilla antenna fighting is on its way to becoming a lost art.

Resound. Resound.

Resound. Resound.

Here is the link for the Bigfoot photo on Fox

You will be annoying him, while he will be GUTTING YOU.

Posted by soheifox at 2008-08-15 07:25 PM | Reply | Flag

Says you. I say he won't get close enough to do anything, And you didn't answer the second scenario.

Anyone who answers the second scenario sees how useless the gun is to someone who really wants to take your money. Try again.

Scenario two:

You are the bad guy. You have to take the money off the good guy with the gun or serious consequences will happen in your life. Unfortunately all you have is a knife. You can not walk away--you must get the money.

Question: How do you get the money?

scenario 1

I have a gun. You have a car antennae. We get in a fight. Who walks away unscathed and alive?

Case closed

Calfchris

Okay, if I'm the bad guy with a knife trying to rob someone I would sneak up from behind and grab them tight around the neck with my one arm and make sure they saw the knife I held in the hand of my other arm . I'd do it that way in order to intimidate and scare the victim enough into letting me rob them without them thinking of trying to fight me back. It also doesn't give the victim much of a chance to pull out his/her gun. Any criminal would want to have the element of surprise over his victim.

Posted by CalifChris at 2008-08-15 03:38 PM

Sorry I didn't see your original post--there were too many bullshit posts blocking the view. Then you can see a gun isn't much use. Can you see that now the bad guy has your gun? If you were the good guy in that situation--would you rather be carrying a gun or a car antenna to be giving the bad guy?

scenario 1

I have a gun. You have a car antennae. We get in a fight. Who walks away unscathed and alive?

Case closed

Posted by goatman at 2008-08-15 10:30 PM | Reply

Scenario two

You have a gun--I have a tank. We get into a fight. Who walks away uscathed and alive?

Case closed

You are and idiot

BuffaloBob

...Can you see that now the bad guy has your gun? If you were the good guy in that situation--would you rather be carrying a gun or a car antenna to be giving the bad guy?

Well, I'm going to have to get down to specifics with you. Do you want my answer to this question as the "good guy" in that scenario or as the "good gal" in that scenario? Because if you want me to play it out as in a real life situation (as a gal) then definitely I'd want a gun. I'd have no other choice in order to defend myself because going mano a mano with any male is out of the question -- I'd lose. Even with a car antenna the guy could lunge and grab it from me so my only weapon has to be a gun,

Now, if you want me to be a guy -- I'd still would like a gun over a car antenna. Can antennas are only for a martial arts "closest make-shift weapon around" scenario.

There is one main difference in scenario 2 where I said if I was the bad guy I would come up from behind and grab the victim around the neck with my one arm and have the knife in the hand of my other arm. A guy who was the potential victim might be able to, thru sheer strength, break the robber's hold around his neck, spin around, and fight the guy. As a female that option isn't available to me.

The main concern for any victim carrying a gun is the possibility the robber could get it away from you and use it on you when originally he had no such intent.

But in answer to your question about if I had to face down a guy with a knife -- whether I was a male or female in the situation -- I'd rather have a gun in my hand if he has a knife in his. A gun is a great equalizer.

"You are and idiot"

This shit just writes itself.

Hey you know who says that while you're annoying them with a car antenna they'll be gutting you?

It's more then just me. It's every branch of the service. The car antenna is listed as a ONE STRIKE DISTRACTION. You know what the knife is listed as? Deadly close combat weapon EVEN IN THE HANDS OF AN INCOMPETENT FIGHTER. There's a big HUGE difference between those two things. bOoB, your fantasies just keep getting more and more demented.

First you're a ninja who can strike the eyes of assailants endlessly, and now you know better then the military.

Quit asking about your "Second scenario". Everyone answering the first also answers the second. The answer for the second is ALWAYS included in the first. That being "I'd try to get the drop on him." All you did was present the same scenario, from both sides. That's not a different "scenario" you ape.

You think you are a ninja, and you think you know better then the special forces. You are an idiot. You lost this argument long ago. I'm done humoring you. When I am given the choice between taking the word of the collective wisdom of dozens of years of Green Berets and SEAL, and a guy who thinks pyramids are beam weapons and Bigfoot is real... y'know, I'm gonna have to go with the highly trained and efficient, combat-proven killers. When I want to know about where to find the most current kook literature, I'm gonna have to choose you over your average SEAL.

But, back on topic, let's quit letting bOoB distract us.

How did the Bigfoot thing turn out? Oh that's right, a bunch of blurry photos and a bunch of bullshit excuses about why nobody reputable is allowed to touch the corpse, and a vague promise of doing it in the future. Oh and an email stating Bigfoot has DNA identical to humans, and had opossum for lunch.

Or something. Looks like common sense triumphed again, chief.

Shoe,

Have you posted here before under a different handle?

Your use of "bOoB" is a bit of a giveaway.

So I took the photo of the bathtub Bigfoot, and compared it to the side view head of the Bigfoot Costume linked waaaaay at the top of this discussion using Photoshop. Instantaneously it is apparent;

Without a doubt Bigfoot in the bathtub is a fake. I am 99.999999999999 and 8/9ths positive these two have faked it. All these conmen did was dirty the face and cut open the mask lips & shove a set of fake teeth inside. The nose/nostrils matches, the eyes and eye socket, the hair line, the wrinkles...even the top lip. It all matches perfectly.

RE; Coast to Coast - It wouldn't be the first time Noory has hosted hucksters on his show. There is, afterall, Ed "we're going into Armageddon Now" Dames, the remote viewer...

Without a doubt Bigfoot in the bathtub is a fake.

Bigfoot likes bubble baths too?

But what if Bigfoot has a car antennae. Then what do ya do?

But in answer to your question about if I had to face down a guy with a knife -- whether I was a male or female in the situation -- I'd rather have a gun in my hand if he has a knife in his. A gun is a great equalizer.

Posted by CalifChris at 2008-08-15 11:24 PM | Reply

You would never be able to get it in your hand. That's the point. Never. Ever. The bad guy makes the first move. Every time. Always. That's what makes them bad guys.

In the second scenario--when the guy starts to overpower you with sheer strength--you shove the knife through his heart. You are a bad guy remember? Don't pull a knife or gun if you aren't going to use it.

But what if Bigfoot has a car antennae.

Can't happen. Just as we all said, it was proven a hoax. 96% of the DNA came from an opossum.

Too bad, bOoB, nobody has to admit they are stupid as you demanded upthread if it was true.

Will you be man enough to admit you are a gullible fool for giving it an 85% chance of being true?

Of course you won't. You don't have the cajones.

(here comes the 'I didn't say that', 'you are a liar' part. Go, bOoB, go!)

BBob

In the second scenario--when the guy starts to overpower you with sheer strength
-- you shove the knife through his heart.

I couldn't do it. I don't have it in me to stab someone like that.

"I don't have it in me to stab someone like that."

Posted by CalifChris

Yes you do, but wouldn't sharing a hot tub and a bottle of Merlot be more fun?

Sure. Lot's more fun, Zat.

Why I'm up late.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."-Carl Sagen

First-person accounts and grainy film and photographs do not qualify as evidence of anything. A real body, laid out on a real autopsy table, being checked out by real scientists...maybe.

Pranks are always good times. People taking pranks seriously make the pranks even better! The really good jokes get air time on national news. Local television reporters will fall for ANYTHING!

"First person accounts....Do not qualify as evidence of anything...."

Even when the thing seen is eventually found? Of course it was evidence. A nice example of a decision-rule determining psychology.

This gets us immediately into issues of great interest. "Real" scientists? Prove that. They did an autopsy? Only they saw it. They wrote their findings up? Why wasn't it all a fantasy.

Decision-rules are necessary, but they ain't life.

There's a hadron collider out there somewhere, so I'm told, by news agencies I'm pretty sure lie to me sometimes. If I went to where they say it is some body (a scientist, but how would I know?) would point it out to me. Then I'd jave to take their word for it.

"Extraoridinary claims require extraordinary proofs...."

Depending upon how high your standards are, nothing is real.

I couldn't do it. I don't have it in me to stab someone like that.

Posted by CalifChris at 2008-08-16 02:46 AM | Reply

But you could shoot them through the heart?

BuffaloBob

But you could shoot them through the heart?

You always set up a scenario where I have to mortally wound the attacker. You have me shooting the attacker in the heart with a gun, or stabbing them in the heart with a knife or car antenna.

Why can't I just shoot my attacker in the foot and then run like hell?