Michael Greene releases new Bigfoot video

That is good evidence. It is only proof is one accepts it. You're working with a very specific definition of proof. Mainly something along the lines of this one. "The degree of evidence which convinces the mind of any truth or fact, and produces belief" And basing you're thoughts around that definition. You could "accept" anything to be true based on what "proof" you have seen. Science on the other hand, is governed by far stricter laws.

I am quite sure I saw a Bigfoot once, no joke, really. So, I am kinda "true believer", I am also skeptic to the n'th degree. I would probably not accept my sighting as true if someone were to relate the same story to me. I do hope that someday someone can prove the existance of BF, it would be extrordinary to watch the social and scientific whirlwind that would ensue. But maybe it is better that it all remain a mystery. Now, all that being said; this video doesn't do anything for me. I will say that it has some interesting aspects. The best part is when the BF on the right, the larger one, aft... [More]

sailing around the globe indicates that one appears to move in a circle. It could be a flat circle or a spherical circle. This is off topic, I know. The proof the earth is a globe was discovered by excactly these sailors long ago: ships they saw on the horizon tended to 'sink' when they sailed faster than the ship the observers were on. But when the ship of the observers increased speed, the ship on the horizon suddenly 'emerged' from the waters again. That inspired a clever ancient Greek - Eratosthenes - to calculate the circumference of the earth, and he was only about a couple of 100 miles ... [More]

It's funny. No evidence will ever be good enough. Someone could shoot the creature and display the body and people would still insist it is fake. Someone grew it in a lab. OR it's just a dead person in a gorilla suit. I say none of you who write on here really exist. You are all imaginary. There is no proof that any of you exist anywhere. All that you write is being randomly generated by a computer somewhere. The Earth doesn't exist. Nothing exists. There is no proof of anything. Sounds crazy doesn't it, but it is no more crazy that what any skeptic says after 11+ million UFO sightings. There ... [More]

If this was a night vision picture from a blackhawk showing human figures being blown apart by a 50 cal., would you say all it shows is a form or white blob running on the ground and exploding or would you say the picture is evidence a person being shot? Just curious. In answer to your request, i would probably say it was 'probably' someone on the ground under attack or in a compramised position, i certainly would not be trying to pedal it as an urban legend. The whole idea of putting night vision images from a blackhawk operation and that of a guy out in the local park for all we really know,... [More]

You missed the point. I agree this isn't a smoking gun, but it is evidence. The point is there will never be enough evidence because the skeptics will always treat the evidence like it is coming from the National Enquirer. I think some of you don't have a grasp of what "evidence" is. By your idea of evidence, I can "prove" anything to you, couldn't I? The video is not evidence of bigfoot at all. It is only evidence that an entity unknown to the viewers made some sort of white light on a video. We don't even know if it is actually a heat sensing camera. For the person who thinks that there are ... [More]

its almost impossible to tell exactly what this is, and it cant be taken as absolute proof... but i still think it looks like a couple of bears. one appears to be sitting on the ground doing bear stuff. the other might be doing bear stuff to a tree (including but not limited to: humping, sharpening its claws, lashing out in bear anger, etc.) but after doing so it walks away between some trees... and it definitely looked shorter as it walked away (such as a bear on all fours) than it did humping that tree (such as a bear on its hind paws would do).

This one shows what a man would look like vs what the creature looks like in the same footage; Like most everyone else I am skeptical of this however I would think a man in a costume would look kind of splotchy and display odd heat patterns because the bulky costume would mask much the body heat, unlike a lightly clothed man, or a "Bigfoot", which would appear as more of a solid color. I for one do tend to believe in Bigfoot’s existence,there are just too many sightings by ordinary people to dismiss it.

"the most important footage of a Sasquatch since rnPaterson/ Gimlin film taken over 40 years ago" Interesting comment since the creaters themselves admited it was a hoax.

is that some guy going toilet behind a tree?