- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Update on "alien" mummies found in Peru
Posted on 10/12/17 at 8:54 am to northshorebamaman
Posted on 10/12/17 at 8:54 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
By eliminating all known marine animals, birds and inanimate objects as a possible candidate for the black objects in the video based a close examination of all of the data contained in the video.
quote:
He didn't conclude it was a sea serpent in that text.
Meh, I didn't post Champagne's entire paper. I just posted the portions explaining how and why he eliminated all known marine animals and birds.
quote:
However, the swimming motions and behaviors, both individually and grouped, are not consistent with the known behavior of either species. Because the behaviors and capabilities of the Clark video images are not consistent with the known abilities and/or behaviors of cetaceans species frequenting the area, it is proposed that the video images are not those of a known cetacean.
quote:
He states it's not consistent with the known behaviors and capabilities of wildlife in the area which is one of the possible logical conclusions that I listed. That's not the same thing as concluding that it's a sea serpent.
Again, I didn't post Champagne's entire paper.
Here's the link to his full report which you can download as a PDF file.
Champagne concludes, "The author suggests that the objects in the Clarks’ January 26, 2004 video are not images of known species or phenomena, or a designed hoax. It is proposed that the images in the video may be an animal the author has labeled the Type III, or Multiple Humped, Animal."
1
Posted on 10/12/17 at 8:58 am to DawgfaninCa
You need to go bring that beast in. Get yourself some salty mates, a big boat, some dive tanks, and a rifle.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:11 am to lsu480
quote:
I know you and your brother saw the SS get stuck while having coffee in 85 but how do you explain it not happening again since smartphones have become a normal thing? Do you think the SS died?
The animals have come back into SF Bay since 1985. Almost all of our sightings since 1985 have been right around dawn in the same general area of SF Bay where we had our first sighting but it is impossible to know exactly where they will appear above the surface of the water and for how long.
If someone is lucky enough to be in the right location at the right time and looking in the right direction and is carrying a smartphone when one surfaces then it still will be difficult to take a photo of it.
We have no doubt that the animals are still alive and thriving because during the sighting we had on January 26, 2004 when we got our first video, we estimated that there were at least 9 animals in the group of animals that surfaced.
This post was edited on 10/12/17 at 9:22 am
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:22 am to DawgfaninCa
We can just run around punting those things back into the sky if thats how big real aliens are.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:24 am to LSU-MNCBABY
You ever read the Vonnegut book Slapstick? Miniaturized folk are scary.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:24 am to Gaston
quote:
You need to go bring that beast in. Get yourself some salty mates, a big boat, some dive tanks, and a rifle.
I'm not going in the water looking for it.
I'm not risking my live just to prove to skeptics that the animals exist.
Besides, I don't think anyone could capture the animal I saw on February 5, 1985.
It was gigantic!!!
This post was edited on 10/12/17 at 9:32 am
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:29 am to DawgfaninCa
Contact the village! Inform them that I have located their idiot!
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:30 am to DawgfaninCa
quote:
If someone is lucky enough to be in the right location at the right time and looking in the right direction and is carrying a smartphone when one surfaces then it still will be difficult to take a photo of it.
Why? The first time you saw it the experience lasted minutes right? And the SS was so close that one of you was going to go touch it...
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:31 am to DawgfaninCa
Why don't you post the video? Seriously? Why the frick not. I can't wait to see your video of feeding seals, or oarfish, or whatever completely mundane thing you think is a sea serpent.
Be honest is your alleged video as good as the one that had John Kirk cumming himself until it was shown and he was made to look like a complete fool. Because that video "which showed clear images of caddy" was just a pod of whales chasing bait.
Be honest is your alleged video as good as the one that had John Kirk cumming himself until it was shown and he was made to look like a complete fool. Because that video "which showed clear images of caddy" was just a pod of whales chasing bait.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:34 am to Jester
quote:
Contact the village! Inform them that I have located their idiot and his name is Jester!
FIFY
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:41 am to lsu480
quote:
If someone is lucky enough to be in the right location at the right time and looking in the right direction and is carrying a smartphone when one surfaces then it still will be difficult to take a photo of it.
quote:
Why? The first time you saw it the experience lasted minutes right? And the SS was so close that one of you was going to go touch it...
We were just lucky that we were in the right place at the right time when one of the animals beached itself directly in front of us on a submerged rocky ledge while it was chasing a sea lion.
The animal will never come that close to shore again at that location.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:47 am to BlackAdam
quote:
Why don't you post the video? Seriously? Why the frick not.
I already posted a link to our first video on O-T back in February.
quote:
Be honest is your alleged video as good as the one that had John Kirk cumming himself until it was shown and he was made to look like a complete fool. Because that video "which showed clear images of caddy" was just a pod of whales chasing bait.
I don/t know which video you are talking about that Kirk saw but our videos are good enough to prove that sea serpents exist.
This post was edited on 10/12/17 at 9:50 am
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:49 am to DawgfaninCa
Fair enough. I also saw earlier in this thread when debunking the oarfish theory you said the animal was at least 30 feet but in an interview I saw with you and your bro you guys said at least 60 but probably 100. Is the 100 foot number more accurate or is the 30? Also, how big around was it? Like a steel drum?
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:53 am to BlackAdam
It's grainy video and pictures of some birds or driftwood on the surface of the water. And a lot of magic eye.
Bruce Champaign is a quack that's only hits on Google come up as an offhand comment in wikipedia and a deviant art image on another cryptozoologist's page.
Whats damning is if he actually knows the habits of these purported creatures, why hasn't he produced clear photographic evidence? He should be able to just walk out to this spot and record them properly.
Bruce Champaign is a quack that's only hits on Google come up as an offhand comment in wikipedia and a deviant art image on another cryptozoologist's page.
Whats damning is if he actually knows the habits of these purported creatures, why hasn't he produced clear photographic evidence? He should be able to just walk out to this spot and record them properly.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 9:54 am to DawgfaninCa
quote:
I already posted a link to our first video on O-T back in February.
So it should be no trick for you to post it again. Nobody wants to dig thru posts dating back 8 months.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 10:03 am to lsu480
quote:
Fair enough. I also saw earlier in this thread when debunking the oarfish theory you said the animal was at least 30 feet but in an interview I saw with you and your bro you guys said at least 60 but probably 100. Is the 100 foot number more accurate or is the 30?
You misread what I said. I said, "The animal we saw was black in color the entire length of its upper body which we estimated was at least 30 feet.
30 feet was just an estimation of the length of the upper body of the animal not the entire animal.
Including its midsection and the lower portion of its body that we saw (we never saw its tail) we estimated the entire animal was at least 60 feet.
quote:
how big around was it? Like a steel drum?
The largest part of the animal was in the middle of its midsection and it was much bigger than a steel drum.
You can visit my blog to get a detailed description of what the animal looked like.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 10:05 am to DawgfaninCa
ancient-code.com ey? These alien threads always have the most reputable sources
This post was edited on 10/12/17 at 10:05 am
Posted on 10/12/17 at 10:07 am to Godfather1
quote:
I already posted a link to our first video on O-T back in February.
quote:
So it should be no trick for you to post it again. Nobody wants to dig thru posts dating back 8 months.
I already posted a link in this thread to the thread I started in O-T back in February.
Read this thread and you will find it.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 10:13 am to ZappBrannigan
quote:
It's grainy video and pictures of some birds or driftwood on the surface of the water. And a lot of magic eye.
Bruce Champaign is a quack that's only hits on Google come up as an offhand comment in wikipedia and a deviant art image on another cryptozoologist's page.
Thanks for proving that I was correct when I said that close-minded bigots like you would not accept the expertise of people who have closely examined my first video and concluded that it contains images of several sea serpents swimming in SF Bay.
Now you can attack the expertise of Clifford Paiva and the late Dr. Ed Bousfield.
Page 6 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News