Stacy Brown Jr. And Justin Smeja Found These Footprints In The Sierras


I'm kicking myself right now for missing all the fun. We came back home from the "Kill Site" one day too early. According to Justin Smeja and Stacy Brown Jr., something went down on Monday but we're just going to leave it at that -- for nw. The footprint above is one of many prints found at "Site B" -- another location a few miles from base camp. Stacy Brown Jr. is currently on a plane back to Florida and we're just as anxious as anyone else about the details. Stay tuned!

Toes? Not sure. More details later.

Comments

  1. Does that first pic look like a Wallace cutout to anyone else?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oooooooooooo

      Aaaaaaaaaaah

      A bear track

      Delete
    2. Good Morning, all you FISH EYE FOOLS!!!!!

      Delete
    3. HILLARY will rule US all .... in 2016
      FOR OUR SAFETY : )

      Delete
    4. New cat

      http://m.nautil.us/blog/watching-the-birth-of-a-new-breed-the-werewolf-cat

      MMC

      Delete
    5. ans Benghazi
      its not Hillary fault !!!!

      Delete
    6. Hilldog got what it takes to keep US all SAFE

      Delete
    7. Big foot tracks? Are you kidding me. Boy are these guys getting desperate!

      Delete
    8. Keep seeing that therapist bro. If a something exists, it leaves trace.

      Delete
    9. You're right. Hoaxers leave traces all the time. Most frauds do.

      Delete
    10. Shoot and kill one but make sure to hide it in the bushes and come back a month or so later. That should work out great!

      Delete
    11. 2:25... Yeah, what a one in a million prediction that would be for a hoaxer to leave tracks, sometimes 50 miles into wilderness areas so that someone so happens to stumble across it, eh?

      Delete
  2. This is exactly the evidence we have all been waiting for

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. as long as it anit a track of a snallygaster they chase them AIMS team off that mountain and Trapper and Wild Bill said leave that critter where it be

      Delete
  3. Did you know that Joe weighs over 300 pounds? And if you sede him in person, you will have the laugh of your lire like I had!

    What a pathetic loser!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Will be the first thing I will do next time I sede him

      Delete
    2. ^^^ err..pardon me ? ...who`s the loser peeping tom ?

      hint.....you !

      Delete
    3. The guy over 300 pounds is the loser yeah

      Delete
    4. ^ ...seems the peeping tom obsessive is going under big time...you laughable jerk.

      Delete
    5. ^Still not over 300 pounds like you

      Delete
    6. ^anonymous fat-like-a-hog joe

      Delete
    7. ^does not deny being a come breathed queen

      LMFAO

      Delete
    8. ^no need to deny obvious silly things said by silly people.
      Now, the fact that you are fat like a cow is not silly, is pathetically real

      Delete
    9. ^ obsessed with Joe. And an admitted kiddie fiddler

      Delete
    10. ^admitted anonymous fat-like-an-hyppo joe

      Delete
    11. ^ obsessed with big hairy guys. Now I understand. Joes secret admirer is a closet case

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

      Delete
    12. Yes ^^. You are correct. He finds Joe too attractive to let go

      Delete
    13. Must be joes intellect that turns him on.

      He wants to cook Joe breakfast

      Delete
    14. uh multiple anonymous joe pretending that people do not see that it's just joe.

      pathetic. now let's go eat some chips, babe

      Delete
    15. ^^^^ obsession is not healthy. Nor is calling your hand babe

      Delete
    16. ^uhuhuh. My hand is not fat like yours at least.

      Delete
    17. Be nice, guys!

      Now, who here is FISH EYED??!!!

      Delete
    18. NO SIR....
      WILD BILL cookin up that thar campfire grub whilst he be bear huntin
      ans tham Woman folks gits to wait till da huntin is done

      Delete
    19. Fact:
      1. Joe F is not Welsh
      2. He is a Negro!
      3. He is dumb!
      4. He is very tall and skinny!

      Delete
  4. Are our souls just the product of chemical reactions in our bodies or are they incorporeal entities that use our bodies as a vessel?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does it matter? We ALL find out in the end.

      Delete
  5. So recently i've been having sleep paralysis. And every time, I see a shadow of a man standing at my door. I can hear a very low voice, low enough to make it hard to hear. I want to yell, but I can only manage out small whimpers. It's like dreaming, but you're half awake. The strangest part is, it feels like it lasts seconds, but minutes have actually gone past.

    Any other strange or similar experiences with sleep paralysis and such?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Try waking up covered in bruises and bleeding around the butt. True story.

      Delete
    2. I have the sleep paralysis too I don't see anyone but they are there! This happens a couple times a year sometimes more! Scary shit!

      Delete
    3. I can relate to both 1 14 and 6 37. Happens to many many folks. Had many strange occurances happen during these episodes that are outside of just being paralyzed that I will not go into right now. If you want them to stay away might try to keep a large dog in your bedroom at night. Did this in 1996 and have never had another visit.
      Chuck

      Delete
    4. you been abducted by GRAYs they immobilize you take you and extract DNA to make clones and hybrids they been doing it for years

      Delete
    5. Why do they have to tear me a new taterhole just to get my DNA?

      Delete
    6. GRAYs need the purest form so you gets the probe and a chip to tag you like we tag cattle for the harvest .

      Delete
    7. Dang chuck

      Do tell
      Do tell

      MMC

      Delete
  6. Once again, hello denizens/users/visitors/frequenters of bigfoot evidence, the message-board that discusses things that are not considered by the herd/masses to be "normal"

    With so much effort by the shills/disinformation-agents going on in trying to discredit the idea of shills even existing, trying to make it look like some type of idea or ruse that only idiots would subscribe to, i feel i have to chime in and once again raise awareness of the existence of these professional liars.

    Shills are people that are payed by someone to spread some misinformation for a specific purpose. They are extremely hard to spot unless you are aware of their presence, know their strategies/tactics, and look for them, like an animal camouflaged in it's environment. Just like an animal with camouflage, they are constantly adapting to their environment by learning how to conceal themselves, so us freethinkers and truth seekers must be diligent, vigilant, and skeptical if they are to be spotted so they may be properly assessed and dealt with so intellectual discourse may continue as unimpeded as possible .

    Remember: shills/disinformation-agents get payed for what they do, and are thus monetarily motivated, which provides them with their subsistence, food, drinks/water, shelter, party supplies, and tools/technology. Freethinkers and truth seekers must be motivated non-monetarily for their thirst for knowledge and truth, while not being scared to eloquently and precisely present their opinions and research, seeing everything with a skeptical and questioning eye.

    Also, Remember: they use all the information they gather from their assigned areas (forums, meetings, chatrooms, etc.) through datamining to add to their database which will then later be used for the creation of new tactic/stratagem for disinformation to be taught to recruits, new and old.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ART BILL a guy Bugs killed 2 bigfoots in TX . as i recall he gave ART BELL a map so ART could claim the bodies and the proof

      Delete
    2. I could get paid for this? I've been doing it for free. Well, sumbitch......

      Delete
  7. Replies
    1. WHAT ? ...why,you cheap punk !

      Delete
    2. NO poop next to a tree to mark where you have been
      for your SAFETY

      Delete
  8. Replies
    1. Hawgzilla got loose TRAPPER and AIMS needs to trap it again !!!

      Delete
    2. NOooooo not hogzilla say it isnt SOoooo.....

      Delete
    3. That 250 Lb Hog, was bought from Mr.Stevens. The producers paid $300 for it!
      Hogzilla, as phony as that Marine!

      Delete
    4. WILLY gits sloppy tham hawgs sos he knowin abouts tham hawgs WILD BILL ans Willy trackin hawgzilla to that trap shure did

      Delete
  9. Got little creature suit?

    No?

    Well then there is your little creature.

    Schooled.

    Peace.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Find me an anthropologist, primatologist, wildlife biologist, a costume expert and show me physical evidence that supports the little creature, and you have a case.

      Peace.

      Delete
    2. ^How about showing us a fucking photo you don't have to squint to make the sucker out. Anything post 1970 will do.

      Delete
    3. Why, it'll always be a monkey mask to you? These 'suckers' don't hang about to say cheese, and should you come across something like this in the wild that you didn't think was there, the last thing you'll be thinking about it getting your camera out.

      Delete
    4. Yet another troll pwned by Mr. Joe. I love it.

      Delete
  10. At best we can say that lying/LARPing is a hypothesis to explain the great majority of bigfooty claims, and then evaluate the evidence. Here's a hypothetical example:

    1. Someone claims to invest a lot of time in searching for, and trying to prove the reality of, bigfoot.

    2. That person claims to find bigfoot, i.e., "have an encounter."

    3. The person leaves the area.

    We've seen this scenario played out countless times, including the PGF, Meldrum at Snelgrove Lake (and Freeman's spot AND the Skookum spot), and every episode of Finding Bigfoot. The behavior is completely inconsistent with the claim of trying to prove something really rare and fantastic to the world and counter to the way real zoologists discover real animals every day. It is, however, completely consistent with people claiming to believe something but not really believing (nudge nudge, wink wink).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, if you look at the data, researchers seldom have encounters with Sasquatch, though do pick up ample physical and biological sign of them to which fuels steady influx of fruit baring research. The reality is that 90% of researchers are exactly that due to a desire to validate past impartial & unprovoked experiences. Tracking a wild human in the woods is very difficult, because they have the ability to think and evade like we do. There's a reason why the Hoopa refer to them as 'the boss of the woods'. Understanding how to track them is the only thing that prevents researchers having more frequent encounters. Merely claiming that researchers leave areas is simply not the truth when you look at the data there is of accumulating decades worth of physical evidence off the back of ten thousand years of cultural and contemporary references. All of a sudden, the formula that calls lies on others, looks like the lies, doesn't it?

      1. Someone has an encounter.

      2. That someone tries validating that encounter.

      3. That someone accumulates physical/biological sign and draws from similar encounters.

      Though there are plenty of exceptions that have yielded legitimate results, this is in fact the realistic formula regarding the majority field. For example, you cannot have something that can be falsified in the mind to which then manifests into physical scientific evidence; that is one of the greatest leaps of faith ever. Sasquatch sightings have spanned thousands of years in Northern California. Researchers over the past few decades have accumulated large amounts of evidence from that area, and are still there accumulating evidence to this day. The notion that someone is not returning to that area is simply not applicable and audaciously; lying/LARPing.

      Lastly... Suggesting that the efforts of some of the most famous researchers who are no longer with us did not amount for an effort at getting into the field after previous experiences, is expressing extreme naivity to the facts. Patterson's footage was attained after his intial experience and Freeman collected much more evidence after his... This couldn't have happened without hard work and doing the total opposite of what has been suggested. There are still researchers in Washignton State where the Skookum cast was found to which reports predate that significantly, and there are still researchers on Ontario where the Snelgrove Lake sample was attained... Again, the reports predate such a source very significantly.

      Peace.

      Delete
  11. I bought this book expecting to learn more about bigfoot. Instead I got a book about Bill Munns.

    In this book we are told not to pay any attention to Roger Patterson's back story, and to focus only on what we can see in the film. Most skeptics realize that is because the back story is extremely damning against the authenticity of this being a film of bigfoot, and that back story points to a hoax for profit. Yet while so very little attention is paid to the back story of the PGF, it appears that the majority of this book focuses on the back story of Mr. Munns, who appears to put himself and his story front and center as proof that his work has validity. However, if we apply the same philosophy, and pay no attention to Mr. Munns' back story, and only focus on what evidence we actually see in the book, the same thing happens; we see the continuation of a hoax for profit, part deux. The main premise seems to be that Mr. Munns cannot figure out how to make a convincing bigfoot suit, and so Patterson's bigfoot suit must be a real bigfoot. Don't need over 500 pages to say that!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I however love taking about backstories! Shall we? Let's!!

      Greg Long; he's been caught out falsifying interviews that were published in his book. The 'costume expert' that 'made the suit' has no record of Roger buying anything from him and had to hire a costume expert to make a gorilla suit that looked nothing like Patty. Bob H has more contradictions about the suit he wore than anything I've heard and can't even find the 'film site'. You see... There's money in hoaxing a hoax, expecially when your target audience are largely skeptical of the subject already. Author David Murphy had spent 11 years writing the biography of Roger Patterson. In this time he interviewed over 70 people who had some acquaintance with Roger and Bob or people who knew them extremely well, and in that time he came across not one person who didn’t think highly of both individuals, not to mention endorse their credible nature. This is in direct contrast to Greg ‘Liar’ Long who’s book was an attempt at making money from hoaxing a hoax.

      Nearly all of the most successful people you can think of in show business have been sacked once in their careers. Bill Munns has a 30 year career covering every element of special effects. Focussing on an instance in that time where a very conflicting and opinionated field manifested itself at his expense means you're looking for a means to attack the researcher, not the research to which there is no rational countering argument, and nothing more. We already know that Munns was on a tight budget, and we already know the relationship between Munns and O'Bannon was frosty. I think there's enough credentials in Munns' CV that shows him very accomplished at make up... Considering we're talking about a magic monkey suit here, it's moving the goal posts ever so slightly. Professional biases are always rife in the film business and people get legs up and favoured all the time, not to mention conflict of creative opinion is very common. Also... When the legacy of a film is someone getting sacked, there's usually not much sympathy and compassion for he who got the hump. Munns is an expert in constume, his work in comparison to the alleged suit made in 1967 would far exceed any accomplishments and manufacturing skills of a broke cowboy who would have knocked it up in his garage, and you are as daft as ever and agenda driven as ever.

      "The main premise seems to be that Mr. Munns cannot figure out how to make a convincing bigfoot suit, and so Patterson's bigfoot suit must be a real bigfoot. Don't need over 500 pages to say that!"

      No... The premise is that a costume expert's research indicates that a normal human's proportions cannot fit that of the subject in the PGF, whilst the suggested organic tissue cannot be replicated by modern suit manufacturing means. Now then... You cannot prove or disprove the legitimacy of that research without testing it... How would one do that? Evidence doesn't 'stop existing' because you have a preconceived default position that can't be supported, that's as anti-scientific as you can get, not true skepticism and in fact simple denial.

      That's right... Got monkey suit?

      Delete
    2. Do you have the toy submarine with the dinosaur mounted on it? No? There it is folks. Nessie is real. What stupid logic.

      Delete
    3. Test the source sufficiently, or your default position that it is not organic tissue cannot be supported. Find me a long line of relevant scientists that support a scrutinised Nessie source, and then show me physical evidence that supports that same Nessie source, and then YOU have something that steers away from being considered stupid.

      Delete
  12. must be a gator print
    still looking for it's arm

    ReplyDelete
  13. No sign of Joe since that little creature video that smoked the sht out of his "got monkey suit?" argument.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Why would a skeptic be upset if bigfoot is proven? I think many of them with a genuine interest would be pleased.

    It is the hardcore proponents, that stretch rational belief by accepting so many pieces of evidence as genuine, who are shattered time after time after time when nothing ever turns out to be bigfoot.

    Is the PGF all we have and someone is trying to take it away?

    I just read the Eureka Times-Standard article Kit linked regarding Scoop Beal, Wallace and Bluff Creek. It is from a 3rd party, complete with confessions, and people here are still wearing blinders.

    Go Figure.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Why would a skeptic be upset if bigfoot is proven? I think many of them with a genuine interest would be pleased."

      It's simple, most are ignorant of the facts and celebrate their own ignorance to attain a sense of community. In sheer naivity of the facts regarding evidence, it's easy to come across so confident, but it only lasts as long as someone can point out these facts to which it then turns into aggresive denial, because they've sounded off so much, for so long. Ego's require preserving.

      "It is the hardcore proponents, that stretch rational belief by accepting so many pieces of evidence as genuine, who are shattered time after time after time when nothing ever turns out to be bigfoot."

      It is in fact enthusiasts that are not ignorant of facts and recognize consistent scientific method that points to the evidence from consistent means. There is no requirement to stretch rational belief, because anyone can look at the consistent methods without any fear or agenda, and realize that these are the same impartial scientific techniques that have excelled the very people endorsing the evidence prior to them transitioning into this field. To ignore this fact is abiding to preserving ego and masking fear.

      "Is the PGF all we have and someone is trying to take it away?"

      Actually, there are mounds of physical and even biological evidence to accompany that source. Psuedoskeptics treat this like a taboo of course, like some silently agknowledged blasphemy they have a collective understanding about.

      "I just read the Eureka Times-Standard article Kit linked regarding Scoop Beal, Wallace and Bluff Creek. It is from a 3rd party, complete with confessions, and people here are still wearing blinders."

      You see, this is another angle psuedoskeptics will use to promote the idea that Sasquatch related events were none existent prior to "Wallace hoaxing tracks" or "Patterson hoaxing footage" in the 50's and 60's, embarrassingly maintaining that the whole field started from "questionable sources"... When in fact, if they stop patting eachother on the backs and spend five minutes researching, there is ridiculous amounts of evidence to support to notion of an unknown primate was circulating prior to anything of the sort of time frame.

      "In 1932, Ellis Wright found human tracks in the gypsum rock at White Sands, New Mexico. His discovery was later backed up by Fred Arthur, Supervisor of the Lincoln National Park and others who reported that each footprint was 22 inches long and from 8 to 10 inches wide. They were certain the prints were human in origin due to the outline of the perfect prints coupled with a readily apparent instep."

      In the next link provided, Al Hodgson who was a resident at Willow creek either side of the war, States that when he returned from serving in the army, that the community were well aware of giant hairy humanoids in the area;

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/watch-this-2005-interview-with-al.html?m=0

      Go Figure!

      Delete
  15. The two biggest assholes in the field with Shawn placing a close third as the media whore extraoridinaire

    ReplyDelete
  16. You bigfooters are so stupid! You believe anything! Anything!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. whuts tham wurds u be ausin caws its nohow soundin rite

      Delete
    2. I recently when out on a Big foot night investigation, We really couldn't see anything. I broke a branch on the way in. On the way out one of our members said it was caused by a Big foot! A TRUE STORY!

      Delete
  17. Hey Joe F it's TTL??? What's new over there? I went into the bush this weekend!! Pretty thick still! I'll be going every week for the next 3 to 4 months so I'll have video and pics to share with u ! Have a good day bud!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey TTL I go into your wife's bush all the time. It's very thick and very hairy! I will be visiting her for the next 3-4 months while your away!

      Delete
  18. cool another bear track

    at least in conveniently offers hope that these weekend camping trips with the bigfoot stars offer real experiences with the magic mnkeys

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. bears NO SIR that be a traxs fer the Grassman

      Delete
    2. It can't be a bear print. In bear prints; you still have claw marks. Bears have dual tracks; the left paw and the right paw are parallel as you track through. If there was any other parallel tracks, they would have been identified very quickly.

      Delete
  19. Above print just goes to show you. Put yourself in bigfoot country and never know what you may find.
    Nice work Stacy and Justin. Look forward to the details.
    Chuck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you don't honestly believe anything smeja says do you?..and lets face it they just happen to find this after everyone leaves...think about it bigfootweekend was a bust but whoa hold your horses chief!! look what we got

      Delete
    2. Joe not only is he not legitimate he makes jokes about how gullible people are, and i have heard them with my own ears

      Delete
    3. He'd be right, some people are gullible. I'm not sure what that means about his experiences.

      Delete
    4. Well he was going to poach some bear a felony by the way shot a mom and her cub got scared and the rest is his sudden rise to fame by taking advantage of a Bigfoot community starving for any evidence at all

      Delete
    5. Yeah, that's what the people who are opposed with just as much claim to the truth as him, state.

      I'm inclined to go with his very obvious passion post encounter, as well as the word of other trustworthy researchers affiliated to him.

      Delete
    6. As always. I agree with you on this one, Joe. Smeja is not a hoaxer/liar about bigfoot.

      Delete
    7. Shooting a female bear with cubs is NOT a felony. Stop making shit up dumbass

      Delete
  20. BE...proving Bigfoot doesn't exist on a daily basis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. very true!!!!...should be called bigfoot pimpin'

      Delete
    2. Yet you have a Sasquatch track up top, you people will deny till it makes you ill, come on guys, you sound nuts.

      Delete
    3. And of course it's 100 percent undeniable right?

      Delete
    4. You either trust the source or not... When every source is discounted as legitimate, it's pretty much a greater leap of faith to maintain it's all of the same calibre.

      I trust the source, and it's consistent with other tracks I've seen.

      Delete
    5. That's just it, a-hole. You've never seen a track have you? It's all someone else's so called track your pinning all your hopes on. And these frauds will happily provide them as long as it keeps them from working a 9 to 5 job and gives them $3.00 of internet fame.

      Delete
    6. Upset much?

      The difference between you and me is I don't dismiss sources presented by scientists who are trustworthy. You then apply those examples to what's accumulated there after... It's not rocket science.

      Delete
  21. curious. How does 99% of Bigfoot "evidence" come from 1% of the population?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. most folks stays in tham city ors in tham houses sos they dont gits out fer lookin ats fer tham bigfoots

      Delete
    2. obama got the NSA to surveil all
      for your SAFETY

      Delete
    3. 8:02... Pro tip... Most made up statistics are as reliable as your anonymous credentials.

      Delete
    4. No more unreliable than bigfoot evidence provided by idiots trying to make a living hunting for bigfoot.

      Delete
    5. If someone puts the effort, time and own finances into a pioneering research field, then why shouldn't they make a little money back for their efforts.

      With the exception of researchers who write books, it's a myth that Sasquatch researchers make a steady living off this subject. Enthusiasts always appreciate news and updates too.

      Delete
  22. I am starting a new tradition!! Everyday I will post the Youtube troll comment of the day!! Here is the first one to start it off with a bang!!

    The Video: 90 Minute Human Growth Hormone (HGH) Release - Isochronic Binaural Beats - www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHEkXiKhK9c



    The comment:

    TheStranger662805 months ago

    Help! I've been listening to this for 5 minutes and I now have 8, 5ft long dicks that grew a mind of their own and are now consciously raping everything around me!



    ReplyDelete
  23. can we now call all the bigfoot weekend pros ( term used very lightly of course )... the scat pack,because they be full of shyt

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story