Mermaids: The Bodies Found - Page 6

On August 14 2012 01:27 Equity213 wrote:


We have to find a reverse mermaid, with the fish part on top and the lady part on the bottom.

On August 14 2012 01:04 Coagulation wrote:
I know a guy that constantly swears to me up and down with the most absolute stone cold seriousness that when he was a kid he was in the woods and he seen a big foot crashing through the woods chasing after a deer. he says it tackled the deer at a full speed run and snapped its neck and threw it over its shoulder and walked away with the deer on its shoulders.
he swears up and down that its true.. and Im pretty damn good at detecting bullshit. I dunno if he seen bigfoot or not but he sure thinks he seen bigfoot.

Hes obseessed with bigfoot.. has websites and shit about the "hunt for bigfoot"

I dunno.... man.

On August 13 2012 15:09 KurtistheTurtle wrote:
my girlfriend is smart, good student, etc, but brace yourself: she believes in mermaids with all her heart.

On August 14 2012 01:43 GrapeApe wrote:


This might be a dumb question, but coming from a semi-believer in BigFoot/Sasqutch, I have to ask where he claims this occured at (state/country)?

I say semi-believer because I believe that 1) Something USE to be there, but pretty solid chance it isn't anymore. And 2) IF there IS something, I don't think it's in the United States (with the exception Alaska), but more likely to be a Yeti or an Oreng-pendek (which is most probably an Orangutan). Suuuper remote places in the world are still revealing all sorts of crazy things. I read a story of a Tiger researcher in, I believe, India who had been in a particular forest for over 10 years and had seen 1 Tiger in that entire span, even though he was 100% certain they were there. And he never saw an elephant, which were also present in the forest.

Personally, I live in a pretty 'wildernessy' place, with very high Moose and Bear populations, as well as a high Bobcat population and a Low mountain lion population. I've spent and do spend a lot of time in the woods, fishing, following streams and rivers, and whatever else, and can honestly say that I have seen 1 bear in all my years of stomping around the woods and drving through them.

My point is that we have LARGE animals that we know exsist that, given the right conditions, can disappear and not be seen for years, so when you mutiply that by, like, 1 thousand in regards to a jungle or one of the more remote forests on Earth, it becomes a little more likely that some sort of large unknown primate does exsist.

And then you times in by a million and you have the ocean, which still have zero chance of mermaids, but I bet some scary shit lurks down there we've never seen before. Giant Squid and Colossal Squid are scurry enough :\

On August 14 2012 01:29 PassiveAce wrote:

thats even worse imo.

On August 14 2012 01:43 GrapeApe wrote:


This might be a dumb question, but coming from a semi-believer in BigFoot/Sasqutch, I have to ask where he claims this occured at (state/country)?

I say semi-believer because I believe that 1) Something USE to be there, but pretty solid chance it isn't anymore. And 2) IF there IS something, I don't think it's in the United States (with the exception Alaska), but more likely to be a Yeti or an Oreng-pendek (which is most probably an Orangutan). Suuuper remote places in the world are still revealing all sorts of crazy things. I read a story of a Tiger researcher in, I believe, India who had been in a particular forest for over 10 years and had seen 1 Tiger in that entire span, even though he was 100% certain they were there. And he never saw an elephant, which were also present in the forest.

Personally, I live in a pretty 'wildernessy' place, with very high Moose and Bear populations, as well as a high Bobcat population and a Low mountain lion population. I've spent and do spend a lot of time in the woods, fishing, following streams and rivers, and whatever else, and can honestly say that I have seen 1 bear in all my years of stomping around the woods and drving through them.

My point is that we have LARGE animals that we know exsist that, given the right conditions, can disappear and not be seen for years, so when you mutiply that by, like, 1 thousand in regards to a jungle or one of the more remote forests on Earth, it becomes a little more likely that some sort of large unknown primate does exsist.

And then you times in by a million and you have the ocean, which still have zero chance of mermaids, but I bet some scary shit lurks down there we've never seen before. Giant Squid and Colossal Squid are scurry enough :\

On August 14 2012 02:12 Coagulation wrote:
yep it doesnt make sense that there is absolutely zero fossil records to support any kind of claims of bigfoot yet we can pretty much find extensive fossil records of any and all the creatures we know for a fact exist today or have existed.

I remember he refuted this problem by saying "the most likely destroyed the bodys of their dead"

On August 14 2012 02:12 Coagulation wrote:
yep it doesnt make sense that there is absolutely zero fossil records to support any kind of claims of bigfoot yet we can pretty much find extensive fossil records of any and all the creatures we know for a fact exist today or have existed.

I remember he refuted this problem by saying "the most likely destroyed the bodys of their dead"

On August 14 2012 01:54 Dosey wrote:

How so? It's got all the useful parts... without the nagging.

On August 14 2012 05:57 Euronyme wrote:


You think so? Imagine this:
You wake up in the morning and turn to face your beautiful wife. Instead you're faced by this + Show Spoiler + sticking up under the covers.
You have grossly disfigured children together than you have to nurse along with your wife, as she can't actually use her fins to handle cutlery.
You go to work, and when you come back your wife is waiting for you in a sexy pose + Show Spoiler +
You slowly get more and more depressed, and one day when cleaning up goo on the floor left by your wife and children you decide to end it all and kill yourself by watching history channel "documentaries" on aliens, UFOs, mermaids, big feet, unicorns and harry potter. After mere five hours your brain melts and drips out your ears.

It's a nasty way to go man...

On August 14 2012 06:13 Dosey wrote:

You went too low with the body. It has to have boobs and arms or it's a no deal.
Aside from that, you make far too many assumptions homie. You assume that I wont paper bag her. You assume that I want children. You also assume that I would kill myself via brain melting by watching history channel. If I want to kill myself in such a way, I can just read your post history.

BAZINGA