1st: Visit @TallestFAGGOTS profile 2cnd: Notice that he has NO original posts of his own 3rd: Read his comments. Not ONE of them are positive and are all meant to derail 4th: They are all TARGETED at specific subjects such as 'QULTIST' 5th: Stops posting once called out(creates alt to derail moar)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (37)
sorted by:
I’ll file alongside the lochness monster and birds aren’t real.
These are “fun” harmless conspiracies (non political) that conveniently lend to the view of conspiracy people as wackos who drink by themselves in the woods lol.
So your filing system need refining, since there is quite a bit of compelling photographic, film and video evidence for Bigfoot, from different places on the planet, along with historical records and witness testimony going back centuries - but nothing remotely like that for the other two. The bird thing was an elaborate prank made up by a guy who despises conspiracy theorists.
Keep on analyzing those shitty photos that are definitely of a secret intelligent human like species that hides in the woods all this time but knows to avoid game trail cameras, drones, and high resolution satellites.
And has never been hunted.
But has managed to migrate and spread worldwide?
As long as you don’t look into political conspiracies, we’re all good here!
Keep looking for the hairy monkey men lol.
Edit: I know birds aren’t real was supposed to be fake but it was promoted and allowed to gain traction for a reason. It’s presenting an idea of what a conspiracy theorist is in the most mocking way.
What ever you need to tell yourself. I don't find anything you've said here to be a remotely compelling argument against the existence of a bigfoot, yeti, sasquatch type animal. For example - The trail cameras, drones and satellite have a tiny % of the wilderness under extremely intermittent surveillance. Satellite: useless because of trees, and high resolution satellites are not trained for long stretches on remote areas where the animals might be found. Drones and trail cameras are not in truly remote areas at all, they are within reach of humans, in locations where humans go, for the very reason that humans go there, and have to go there to retrieve them.
Anyway, despite those arguments, there have been a rare few compelling video captures on fixed cameras in remote locations. But they are poor resolution, like most fixed CCTV cameras and the majority of cameras on drones and trail cameras. It's easy to overestimate how much of the world is under close scrutiny to a high resolution. It's really a very very tiny percentage, and it's also a relatively, very recent phenomenon. Just a few decades ago there was even less, and before that zero.
Can you disprove that there are tiny clown monsters living in the same area?