|
Don't forget, folks - we have always been at war with Eastasia!
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
ErIog posted:You mean giffy files? .gif is a mass delusion bro. It's always been .giffy giphy twistedmentat posted:Yea, I love those two. There's also the whole "Person on TV clearly turning into a lizard!!!!" set of videos that are literally just studio light reflections on the eyes, or odd shadows or whatnot. there was that movie about lizard aliens in human suits taking over the earth in the 60s or 70s. Did that cause large numbers of conspiracy nuts to worry about reptilians like precious bodily fluids in Dr Strangelove did for flouridation or did they merely hop on the bandwagon 
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 10:09
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
blowfish posted:giphy Dr. Strangelove was a satire of the anti-fluoride movements that went along with the red scare.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
blowfish posted:giphy That was "V", from the 80's. Started out as a "Let's do a show on World War I I, but change it " (does a huge line of coke) "to ALIENS instead of Nazis!" (Admiring snorts all round). Having been a bit of a ufo nut as a goonlet (before my skepticism gland kicked in) I remember reading about reptilians back in the 70's. They were just another type of alien back then, along with grays, Nordics, regular humanoids, robots and probers. I guess they got into politics later, under Reagan.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
MrUnderbridge posted:That was "V", from the 80's. Started out as a "Let's do a show on World War I I, but change it " (does a huge line of coke) "to ALIENS instead of Nazis!" (Admiring snorts all round). When I went through a similar phase of my adolescence in the mid to late 90s I would listen to art bell on the radio and he would often have women call in and talk about having sex with reptilian visitors at night. I don't remember politics being involved there either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
I just bought lots of an lots of UFO and Ghost books. I totally bought into the whole ancient aliens thing after finding Chariots of the Gods at a book sale. Thing is, I thought "Why do archaeologists miss this? Its so obvious?" rather than "They're suppressing it!!!" which seems to be the go to answer these days. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbiWuK1d8qY&feature=share Uh, a guy who sees pictures of underground installations that are public record and assumes its a real Alien Prison, I don't think he's as protected as he thinks. twistedmentat fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Aug 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
The lizard people thing is big today because of David Icke. For a brief time in the late 80's he was a British TV personality and politician for the Greens. But he had a break-down and went crazy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2MEN4-49dM Some people would say he really knows the TRUTH! As seen on V! Or you could argue he was intentionally discredited/drugged.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
Has Alex Jones weighed in on the veracity of the flag in the Chinese explosion?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
McDowell posted:The lizard people thing is big today because of David Icke. For a brief time in the late 80's he was a British TV personality and politician for the Greens. But he had a break-down and went crazy. He nailed it with Edward Heath though didn't he? Maybe not the blood drinking reptile stuff, but Ickes been banging on about a Westminster Paedo ring since the 90's. Think he even had Savile pegged a decade early, although that seems like it was an open secret. twistedmentat posted:I just bought lots of an lots of UFO and Ghost books. I totally bought into the whole ancient aliens thing after finding Chariots of the Gods at a book sale. Thing is, I thought "Why do archaeologists miss this? Its so obvious?" rather than "They're suppressing it!!!" which seems to be the go to answer these days. I never bought into Chariots of the gods, to lowbrow for my razor sharp 90's brain. However, Graham Hancock and his book fingerprints of the gods got me totally. And if I'm being totally honest, I think he is being sort of proved right. Only in that civilisation is older than is though, not that the pyramid was built with forgotten technology. I can't wait until the sequel, Magicians of the Gods comes out in sept. I think he is right, the guy's gonna be hailed as a hero 20 years from now. gobekli tepe is the key!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Illuminti posted:He nailed it with Edward Heath though didn't he? Maybe not the blood drinking reptile stuff, but Ickes been banging on about a Westminster Paedo ring since the 90's. Think he even had Savile pegged a decade early, although that seems like it was an open secret. Yeah - which is why I left that final caveat that maybe he threatened enough people with what he was saying that he was taken care of. But now we have the Heath Ledger Joker as a politicized macro jumping through people's minds. 'Faced with the inescapable fact that human existence is mad, random, and pointless, one in eight of them crack up and go stark slavering buggo! Who can blame them? In a world as psychotic as this... any other response would be crazy!' - The Killing Joke There's something tragic and King Lear-ish about such truth telling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Id0cqNWZ50Y
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 04:08
|
|
|
Illuminti posted:I never bought into Chariots of the gods, to lowbrow for my razor sharp 90's brain. However, Graham Hancock and his book fingerprints of the gods got me totally. And if I'm being totally honest, I think he is being sort of proved right. Only in that civilisation is older than is though, not that the pyramid was built with forgotten technology. I can't wait until the sequel, Magicians of the Gods comes out in sept. I think he is right, the guy's gonna be hailed as a hero 20 years from now. gobekli tepe is the key! Does he take a more "There are weird things out there that beg for more investigation beacuse they don't fit in with the history we already have. Ancient peoples were more advanced than we think" stance than the normal "Ancient people were dumb, magic people did all this stuff!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
One very common assumption that goobers up thoughts on history is that primitive or ancient people were stupid. They may not have been educated but they weren't morons. The other assumption is that anything built to appease the gods was obviously people appeasing aliens or that all religion is about aliens. One of my favorite theories was that a lot of huge stuff was built just to keep the working classes busy during off seasons. Large numbers of people with nothing to do is a problem because they find things to do which may not always be what you want them to. Makes more sense to say "hey all you bored guys here's some cash go build something." Granted other times it was some ruler thinking "wow I sure am awesome, my awesomeness needs an awesome monument built to it." Sometimes it was just cultural; you showed other cultures that this land was yours by building your people's crap all over it. But even so it's truly amazing what one can do with nothing but hand tools, a few thousand bored farmers, and several decades of free time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
Illuminti posted:He nailed it with Edward Heath though didn't he? Maybe not the blood drinking reptile stuff, but Ickes been banging on about a Westminster Paedo ring since the 90's. Think he even had Savile pegged a decade early, although that seems like it was an open secret. The reason for this is pretty bugfuck. He thinks that everyone with political power is descended from the Archons, which is his current name for the lizard people. Rather than being literal space aliens, though, they're sort of interdimensional energy vampire ghosts. People who are descended from interdimensional astral reptoids can be possessed by the Archons more easily so that they can be used as puppets to carry out the Archons' will on Earth. This includes molesting kids because the Archons need psychic energy to survive, and the energy that comes from torturing kids is particularly tasty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 06:27
|
|
|
Luigi's Discount Porn Bin posted:He claims that he called Savile out as a paedophile way before it broke, but there's no record of him saying that - basically you have to take his word for it. It's not impossible, though. Icke thinks literally everyone in any position of power in Britain is a paedo, including the entire royal family. So... Delgonians. Sounds like somebody read the Lensman books!
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 08:18
|
|
|
Did you know that oil is naturally occuring and Rockefeller told people to call it a fossil fuel so he could get rich? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hu_R3gp84TY https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 13:39
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Does he take a more "There are weird things out there that beg for more investigation beacuse they don't fit in with the history we already have. Ancient peoples were more advanced than we think" stance than the normal "Ancient people were dumb, magic people did all this stuff!" I believe his current working theory is that there was an advanced human civilisation that existed around 12,000 years ago and earlier, with a technological level on a par with what we would call the ancient Egyptians but most likely more advanced than that. He isn't afraid to claim that they had some novel technology that we haven't since realised. Then about 12000 years ago there was a large impact from a broken up meteor that caused a huge climate upheaval over the next 1000 years that destroyed that civilisation. The ancient sites that are now being discovered are the remanats of that surviving civilisation. eg gebelki tepe, various monoliths in the med and other structures in the philipines. The ancient cultures we are familiar with are the descendents of those survivors. He briefly went nuts in the 90's with some face on mars crap but has really pulled himself back. He's certainly not the same as those Ancient Alien theorists, seems to genuinely have a brain
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
So all the micro fossils we find in it are just a massive coincidence?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 15:04
|
|
|
Illuminti posted:He briefly went nuts in the 90's with some face on mars crap but has really pulled himself back. He's certainly not the same as those Ancient Alien theorists, seems to genuinely have a brain
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
Illuminti posted:I believe his current working theory is that there was an advanced human civilisation that existed around 12,000 years ago and earlier, with a technological level on a par with what we would call the ancient Egyptians but most likely more advanced than that. He isn't afraid to claim that they had some novel technology that we haven't since realised. Then about 12000 years ago there was a large impact from a broken up meteor that caused a huge climate upheaval over the next 1000 years that destroyed that civilisation. The ancient sites that are now being discovered are the remanats of that surviving civilisation. eg gebelki tepe, various monoliths in the med and other structures in the philipines. The ancient cultures we are familiar with are the descendents of those survivors. The problem with that is the only well dated site, Gobekli Tepe, isn't exactly beyond the ability of hunter-gatherers who have a nice local wild subsistence base. Like the people in Turkey did 12,000 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
How can you not consider the idea that human events are manipulated by supernatural beings who feed on our misery? Maybe it is just a metaphor for our darker nature but it makes sense. Its a concept that has been part of religious belief for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:Did you know that oil is naturally occuring and Rockefeller told people to call it a fossil fuel so he could get rich? Hey now, oil-ified plancton and coal from forests are technically also natural. Just goes to show how "natural" doesn't automagically mean "superior" 
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Luigi's Discount Porn Bin posted:Briefly? He thinks that one of the primary aims of the War on Drugs is to prevent humanity from using hallucinogens to connect with psychic beings from other dimensions. orthodox resistance to the medical benefits of hallucinogens. The other demensional beings poo poo I could do without. KiteAuraan posted:The problem with that is the only well dated site, Gobekli Tepe, isn't exactly beyond the ability of hunter-gatherers who have a nice local wild subsistence base. Like the people in Turkey did 12,000 years ago. As far as ancient civilisation, I haven't read his new book as it's out in september. But even Gobekli Tepe pushes human civilizations progress back much earlier the established interpretation. I think one of his points is that sites like that wouldn't be beyond the ability of people 12000 years ago. He's not claiming any magic tech or aliens, just that human civilisation is older and was more advanced than is supposed here's his latest monolith http://grahamhancock.com/another-megalith-that-rewrites-history-is-found/
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
What you don't seem to understand is how the historical process works. You gather evidence and base your conclusions off that evidence. The reason historians didn't claim the level of progress Goebekli Tepe shows (which is more than what we had seen previously but much less than what Hancock claims) was around back then wasn't because it was thought to be impossible, but because no one had shown evidence. Once evidence was shown, everyone pretty much went, "Ok, that's cool" and accepted it, and Hancock is more or less just angry that they don't listen to the parts of his hypothesis that don't have enough evidence to be supported. If he can show evidence for the more extreme parts of his ideas that isn't just "some other parts of my ideas are right, so they all must be", he'll get more support.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
A Fancy 400 lbs posted:What you don't seem to understand is how the historical process works. You gather evidence and base your conclusions off that evidence. The reason historians didn't claim the level of progress Goebekli Tepe shows (which is more than what we had seen previously but much less than what Hancock claims) was around back then wasn't because it was thought to be impossible, but because no one had shown evidence. Once evidence was shown, everyone pretty much went, "Ok, that's cool" and accepted it, and Hancock is more or less just angry that they don't listen to the parts of his hypothesis that don't have enough evidence to be supported. If he can show evidence for the more extreme parts of his ideas that isn't just "some other parts of my ideas are right, so they all must be", he'll get more support. I understand how it works thanks, I was passing on his theory, I don't really buy into it all (though I'd like to, it's a great story). I'm just pleased that there is some mystery back into the history of human civilisation, ancient sites that are far older than anyone thought. Regardless of weather any of Hancocks wacky ideas turn out to be correct. I loved his book when I was a teenager because I loved ancient history and suddenly here was a book that was saying that there was a whole ancient civilisation we know nothing about. I wasn't critical enough then to realise that i couldn't really put the info in that book next to what I read in genuine history books on the subject. When I heard about Gobelki Tepe I loved it. Can't wait to see what story he weaves out of it in his next book. Even though it will mostly be unsupported!
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Illuminti posted:Hah, yes well there is his well known love of hallucinogens. I well may be wrong, but I don't think he ascribes a an actual targetted conspiracy to the war on drugs. Just a general O
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
Illuminti posted:I understand how it works thanks, I was passing on his theory, I don't really buy into it all (though I'd like to, it's a great story). I'm just pleased that there is some mystery back into the history of human civilisation, ancient sites that are far older than anyone thought. Regardless of weather any of Hancocks wacky ideas turn out to be correct. I loved his book when I was a teenager because I loved ancient history and suddenly here was a book that was saying that there was a whole ancient civilisation we know nothing about. I wasn't critical enough then to realise that i couldn't really put the info in that book next to what I read in genuine history books on the subject. When I heard about Gobelki Tepe I loved it. Can't wait to see what story he weaves out of it in his next book. Even though it will mostly be unsupported! The issue with ancient history is that there are basically guaranteed to be ancient civilizations we know little to nothing about. Not only has time erased a lot of it but sometimes civilizations would literally erase each other. Plus when you consider things like "before writing was invented" no records were kept about ancient civilizations. We can speculate a lot about so many things but without hard evidence there's a lot that's going to be just speculation forever. Think about stuff like the Venus of Willendorf. We know it exists. We have an idea of how old it is. But that's all we know. It exists. We know what it was made of. Who made it? Nobody really knows. How did it get there? What was its significance? Who knows? It could have had religious significance. It could have just been porn. Every time somebody comes out and says "I know what this was!" they're probably being a doofus.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:The issue with ancient history is that there are basically guaranteed to be ancient civilizations we know little to nothing about. Not only has time erased a lot of it but sometimes civilizations would literally erase each other. Plus when you consider things like "before writing was invented" no records were kept about ancient civilizations. We can speculate a lot about so many things but without hard evidence there's a lot that's going to be just speculation forever. Yeah, the Hittite Empire is a great example of that. It's existence was only really confirmed/discovered about 100 years ago, and they were around far more recently. What I like is the idea of discovering an ancient civilisation that is much more advanced than we would expect it to be. A civilisation on a technological level with the Egyptians that existed 6000 years earlier than they did would be incredibly interesting, and considering that despite a sort of general view that human advancement is always progressing up, we know that isn't really true and technological skill can drop away for a thousand years quite easily for various reasons. So it's certainly not out of the realms of possibility from that angle.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
Didn't Hancock argue that Atlantis was Antarctica and it got buried in snow when the surface of the Earth rolled around for some reason 15,000 years ago? Dude is pretty loopy imo. A lot of his "megaliths" are just rocks covered with sea junk that makes them look smooth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Didn't Hancock argue that Atlantis was Antarctica and it got buried in snow when the surface of the Earth rolled around for some reason 15,000 years ago? That reminds me of some other kook who mistook various sunken modern ships and cargo that had fallen out as evidence of Atlantis buildings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
Or the so called Bimini Road, which is just beachrock, and you can see pictures that look exactly like it from other parts of the Caribbean. And then there's those stones off Japan that look kinda like pyramids, but again, when rocks pile up, they tend to take that shape. I think the biggest thing that separates real science and pseudo science, the former gets evidence and makes conclusions from that, like the latter does the opposite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
Illuminti posted:Yeah, the Hittite Empire is a great example of that. It's existence was only really confirmed/discovered about 100 years ago, and they were around far more recently. If you read about ancient history that happens a lot for the same reasons that certain pieces of technology can't be nailed to one region. There are a lot of ideas that actually popped up thousands of years apart in independent cultures. But sometimes you'd have people arguing "well this ceramic technique proves that these civilizations had contact!" Well, no, especially in the case of ceramics. Clay and fire were loving everywhere. It also depends on how you define "advanced." Civilizations developed very differently depending on the area. A civilization that grew up in a swamp (hello, Aztecs!) would have less use for wheels than most others because of local circumstances but "developed the wheel" is considered an important invention. Writing is another one that comes to mind. It just wasn't useful to some peoples so they didn't even bother thinking it up. Similarly it doesn't work like a video game where you develop things in a specific order and X requires Y. People are actually pretty damned clever and can figure out unique ways of doing things if they need to. Just because one civilization figured out wheels before letters doesn't mean they all do it that way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
I remember that the invention of the wheel has been broadened to include wheels that aren't used for transport, like grinding stones and such, because the classical definition is more "invented the cart" rather than inventing the wheel.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:I remember that the invention of the wheel has been broadened to include wheels that aren't used for transport, like grinding stones and such, because the classical definition is more "invented the cart" rather than inventing the wheel. The cart is kind of a natural extension of the wheel and is, in fact, what most cultures end up doing with wheels because carts are useful over most of this rock's land. The issue is that assuming that that is an indicator of development is dumb because wheels are completely useless on certain kinds of terrain. In other cases different forms of movement are actually better. If memory serves sleds not only do way better on snow or permanently frozen ground but also sand.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
I've had multiple games of Civilization where I've colonized Alpha Centauri but never invented the wheel. QED motherfucker.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 05:26
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:The cart is kind of a natural extension of the wheel and is, in fact, what most cultures end up doing with wheels because carts are useful over most of this rock's land. Or areas with hills and mountains, such as the Andes, or jungles and swamps of central and south America. Basically, Anthropologists and Archaeologists have been trying to define Civilization as less a checklist of things that are like white European civilization, and more do these people function as an interconnected society. I will often will put on Ancient Aliens Debunked on when I'm just doing stuff around my apartment, and something I never noticed. Londo on Ancient Aliens says "they said the Moai were moved to their place by wooden rollers, but if you look at Easter Island, there are no trees! How can they do that? Check Mate Skeptics!", when actual people who know actual things know that Easter Island used to have actually quite a lot of trees, but they were all cut down because of the massive production of Maoi. The deforestation of the island caused ecological disaster and was probably the cause of the revolt of the lower classes against the upper, which ceased Moai creation. I just watched a doc on netflix just now called Bigfoot's Reflection about, Bigfoot hunters. It comes across as pretty sympathetic to them, but they make so many logical fallacies. The best is sunk cost fallacy, also lots of strawmen about scientists. "Scientists are too busy doing what makes them money to take Bigfoot seriously!" "Scientists don't want to discover a new large ape like mammal because it will upset their neatly arranged evolutionary model!" "Why would the native peoples make up legends about wild men in the woods? There has to be some truth to it ""Why do Bigfoot feet always look the same and equal pressure across the whole foot? Oh because they walk special!". Also wonderful logic like "Why does everyone see the same bigfoot? Its not like people know what a bigfoot looks like", Uh buddy, Bigfoot has been a cultural icon for decades now, and like aliens, people are used to an certain image of it, and therefor will fill in the blanks. There is also a guy who claims to have seen and heard Bigfoot dozens of times, but does he take a picture of it, or a audio recording, or anything? Nope, we just have to believe him because he is a Native American. Seriously, this was made in 2007, smart phones weren't as common as today, but digital cameras were pretty inexpensive to buy, and if you're trying to find unknown animals, one of those would be perfect. That reminds me of the skeptic who remarked how if ufos and Bigfoot and ghosts and all this stuff are real, you'd think that everyone has a camera in their pocket these days, we'd have hundreds of photos of them showing up daily. But nope. The best was the weaselly way they refuse to actual attempt to produce actual evidence. They claim "Well, we see footprints of black bears and deer, and accept that means they live in that area" Well, duh, but people know these things exist. People have both captured and killed those animals and details studies have been made of them. The Bigfoot researchers refuse to do this because they claim that Bigfoot is some how this part of nature, a ecological wonder and self aware and intelligent like a man, so therefor its immoral to kill or capture one. So they absolve them of actually producing any actual evidence, and think that some footprints, blurry pictures and one grainy film is enough for us to accept there is a hairy wild man in the woods, everywhere. There's a really good book called Abominable Science that gets into the roots of many monster myths, and I mean the roots of the claims about them, not the stories or ancient legends or whatnot. Its interesting that Bigfoot never appears until the mid 50s when as guy first made castings of foot prints.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:If you read about ancient history that happens a lot for the same reasons that certain pieces of technology can't be nailed to one region. There are a lot of ideas that actually popped up thousands of years apart in independent cultures. But sometimes you'd have people arguing "well this ceramic technique proves that these civilizations had contact!" Well, no, especially in the case of ceramics. Clay and fire were loving everywhere. It also depends on how you define "advanced." Civilizations developed very differently depending on the area. A civilization that grew up in a swamp (hello, Aztecs!) would have less use for wheels than most others because of local circumstances but "developed the wheel" is considered an important invention. Writing is another one that comes to mind. It just wasn't useful to some peoples so they didn't even bother thinking it up. Yeah, I agree!
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 08:25
|
|
|
I remember watching this http://www.channel4.com/programmes/quest-for-the-lost-civilisation/episode-guide when it first came out, having literally never heard of Hancock before. I clearly remember going through the stages of. Wow, interesting. .....wait a minute This is Bullshit. Oh, it's one of those documentaries. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 09:53
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:The best was the weaselly way they refuse to actual attempt to produce actual evidence. They claim "Well, we see footprints of black bears and deer, and accept that means they live in that area" Well, duh, but people know these things exist. People have both captured and killed those animals and details studies have been made of them. The Bigfoot researchers refuse to do this because they claim that Bigfoot is some how this part of nature, a ecological wonder and self aware and intelligent like a man, so therefor its immoral to kill or capture one. So they absolve them of actually producing any actual evidence, and think that some footprints, blurry pictures and one grainy film is enough for us to accept there is a hairy wild man in the woods, everywhere. It's significantly cheaper to pay a few guys to wander around in the woods and make logical fallacies than it is to produce a properly researched show.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 10:23
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:It's significantly cheaper to pay a few guys to wander around in the woods and make logical fallacies than it is to produce a properly researched show. There was a show on Channel 4 in the UK called Bigfoot files that attempted a more scientific look at Bigfoot and his cousins round the world a few years ago. It ended up with a claim that it had sequenced some hair that 'might' indicate that the Yeti is some kind of prehistoric bear thought to be extinct. But they interviewed a guy how claimed to have shot and killed a young bigfoot. What was really interesting was that when they examined the claim, i think he had some hair or blood or something, it was just a bear. But when they told him he cried, somehow he had genuinely convinced himself that it was a bigfoot. It was bizarre to watch but a great example of how self delusional humans can be. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...ar-8884811.html All the shows are on youtube. It's a good watch, mainly because it doesn't start from the premise that bigfoot is real! Some interesting stuff about a Russian apeman actually just being some poor black woman bought up to Siberia from Africa and locked up
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 11:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
Oh my sweet stars! Jessie Ventura has gotten into a tussle with Donald Trump! Who is the face? Who is the heel? Where do Hulkamaniacs stand? Inquiring lizards want to know. http://www.infowars.com/ventura-to-trump-you-cant-be-a-benevolent-dictator/
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 05:43
|
|