Category Archives: Cinema

Robert Stark Interviews Author Ray Harris

First Stark broadcast I have run in some time now.

This man Ray Harris is a true intellectual. Stark suggests that he also may be considered Alt Left, and I would agree with that.

A lot of interesting discussions going on here with a lot of it centering on nudity, social nudity, and our very nutty hangups about nudity. The Anglophone world is extremely uptight and Puritanical about social nudity in contrast to most of Europe. Germany and Spain in particular are quite wide open about this subject. There is also a lot about nude minors being portrayed in art. In recent years, the controversy has been mostly about naked teenage girls in movies.

Most of these movies were produced in Europe. Louis Malle’s Pretty Baby features a nude 12-year-old Brooke Shields. This clip is out there on the Internet for all to see because nudity is not necessarily child pornography. You can have all the pictures of naked kids all you want I guess.

Nudism sites certainly do, and they are all over the Net. They show humans including minors of all ages, wandering about in the nude on beaches, forests, etc. It’s honestly not very erotic, and the younger teenage girls are not as hot as you would think. They mostly appeared underdeveloped to me, and I wasn’t very into them. Of course the naked kids are not arousing at all, and I fail to understand why we flip out about this stuff. I mean, I can’t think of anything less interesting than a naked kid of either gender. So why do we have a heart attack every time we see one!? I mean it’s a naked human being. Is that evil or something? Color me mystified. What the Hell’s the matter with you hysterical  Puritans anyway?

Of course I have seen the Pretty Baby clip, and I must say, I can’t see why anyone would be turned on by 12 year old Brooke naked in her shower. I watched it and I thought, “Lame,” and “Why would anyone get turned on by that?” Nevertheless, the hysteria rages on out of control, burning minds to a crisp all over the land.

There’s a long history of painting naked minors, especially females, and in centuries past, it was quite common to paint young naked children. I believe Harris says it’s not done much anymore because artists are too paranoid.

The work of photographers Jock Sturges, David Hamilton, and Bill Henson is gone over. These are modern photographers whose work focuses on naked teenage girls.

Henson likes them real young, like age 13. I’ve seen some of that, and it’s not a turn-on at all. In fact, it’s a huge turnoff. You want to look away because you are thinking a girl that young is too young to be sexualized. It’s not erotic to me in the slightest. Instead it is shocking and weird. They have no bodies at all, no tits to speak of, their bodies look like boys’ bodies (I call females like that “sticks”), and at this point of my life, they really look like little girls. They’re not little girls anymore, but they look like they are.

I think we need laws to keep men and 13 year old girls from having sex. These girls need to be protected from us men, and we men need to be protected from ourselves. It would not be right for this to be legal. That’s practically a little girl.

Hamilton and I think Sturges focus on teenage girls, so that’s a lot more promising. Hamilton’s shots are in outdoor locations, often in groups. The photography is spectacular, and the girls are very beautiful.

On the other hand, at least Hamilton focuses like Henson on young teenage girls. I think most of those girls are 13-15, but correct me if I am wrong. I would have to loved to have looked at them earlier in adulthood because girls that age turned me on a lot more when I was younger like 18-30, but at my age, they just seem too young. It’s too much of a young girl. They’re not even much of a turn-on. Physically they are somewhat of course, but then they seem like too much of a young girl, and they are so underdeveloped and girlish, and that part of it is a turnoff and wipes out the physical part.

I know they are not little girls, but even 16 year old girls are starting to seem like little girls to me now. They are perfectly developed, but it just seems like way too much of a girl, and they seem very immature. I see them, and I think they are in junior high. I figure they are in 7th or 8th grade. I ask them if they are in junior high, and they get offended. Anyway, yes, I have seen Hamilton’s stuff and it is all over the Net if you want to go looking for it, and I assure you that it is all 100% legal. After all, nudity is not child porn. I’ve already seen it, and I have no desire to go looking for it again.

I forget Sturgis’ focus, but I think it was young teenage girls also.

I also worry about these men. What’s with the obsession with 13-15 year old teenage girls? I don’t get it. Sometimes I wonder if these guys’ sexual interests are completely OK. It’s not normal to be obsessed with young teenage girls. You are getting into hebephile territory, and hebephiles are not normal.

This subject has aroused some of the worst lies and libels about me of all. I have tried to address these lies, but I just dig the hole deeper. This is all based on some retarded thinking that people of normal intelligence always engage in. It’s called, “If you write about it, then you do it,” or “If you write about it, then you are one.” There’s also, “If you talk about it, then you do it,” and “If you talk about it, then you are one.” All of these are logical fallacies. Take this arguments to your Logic professor and see what he says.

These are examples of very stupid ways of thinking and almost 100% of the population with average intelligence thinks like this all the time. Now you see why people like me think people of average intelligence are retarded.

The Robert Lindsay Brush Fire about this matter was set off long ago. The fire is 0% controlled and is expected to rage into the foreseeable future. As long as that’s the case, I figure I will pour gasoline on the flames and sit back and watch the devastation. It’s rather entertaining to be a social arsonist. If you can’t beat em, join em.

Robert Stark Interviews Author Ray Harris

Paradise-Reclaimed

Cover of Ray Harris’ newest science fiction novel.

Robert Stark and co-host Pilleater interview writer Ray Harris. He is based out of Australia and is the author of Paradise Reclaimed which is available on e-book.

Link here.

Topics:

Ray’s science fiction novel Paradise Reclaimed about the story of the first interstellar colony.
Warnings about dystopia on Earth and creating a utopia from scratch.
Transhumanism, the idea of both genetic and social engineering, CRISPR Gene Editing, and the influence of Julian and Aldous Huxley.
Ecotopia, Solar Punk, Soleri’s Arcosanti, and combining the primitive and futuristic.
How we have the technology to advance civilization, but corporate and political corruption stands in the way.
Aldous Huxley’s Novel Island.
Jungian archetypes.
The upcoming sequel to the book The Golden City about the colonists returning to Earth after being isolated.
Social nudity, it’s place in the book’s space colony, and whether our aversion to it is rational.
The historic of social nudity, attitudes in Europe and Japan, and the Freikörperkultur Movement in Germany.
Different cultural attitudes towards sex in America, Europe, and Japan.
Developmental vs. chronological age.
The history of attitudes towards sexuality in the West, age of consent laws, and how they affected the arts.
Nudity in art; French Rococo painter François Boucher’s Leda and the Swan; works by Edgar Degas, Vincent van Gogh, and Jean-Honoré Fragonard.
Japanese Shunga art.
The debate about what is art and what is erotica.
Controversial nude photographers Bill Henson, Jock Sturges and David Hamilton.
The film Louis Malle’s Pretty Baby (1978), Eva Ionesco, and Natalie Portman in Léon: The Professional.

If you enjoy the hard work that goes into this website, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site. Donations are the only thing that keep the site operating.

Leave a comment

Filed under Art, Art History, Asia, Cinema, Culture, Europe, Germany, Girls, Jailbait, Japan, Law, Left, NE Asia, Photography, Psychology, Regional, Sex, Spain, USA

Please Don’t Be an Insufferable Ass

Are you insufferable, Bob ?

Santoculto perfectly fit this definition.

I agree that Santoculto could definitely be an insufferable ass. But he also had some nice, concise and brilliant views on a lot of things, particularly human psychology.

Recall that he is gay. Gay Politics won’t let us talk about this, but many gay men are narcissistic. That is one of the reasons they used to think it is a mental illness. No one quite knows why they are like that. If you think about the very shallow gay male scene in the US with its emphasis like good looks, youth, polymorphous perversion, out of control promiscuity, endless brief, near anonymous and loveless relationships, you can see how it would create a lot of narcissists. Of course it’s horribly homophobic to bring this up,  so I guess I will be a big fat homophobe and share this with you all right now.

The gay novelist John Rechy is profoundly narcissistic.

Novelists Jerzy Kozhinski and Philip Roth are notoriously narcissistic. Kozhinski actually made a vast phony history for himself full of many things that never happened. He didn’t get called out on it for a long time, and when he finally was, he simply denied it. His books are good, but he is a bit of a literary fraud as he plagiarized and made up lies about his life. In fact, his entire life could be accurately described as a gigantic fraud.

VS Naipaul in a recent biography comes across extremely narcissistic and it is generally agreed that he was a perfectly awful person.

Kiss frontman Gene Simmons is one of the most insufferable narcissistic asses in all rock and roll, and he has a lot of competition. He is probably one of the most hated people in rock music and for very good reason. Salvador Dali was extremely narcissistic, but he was so weird that it never bothered anyone. Pablo Picasso was a huge asshole, whether he was a narcissist I am not sure, but he probably was. He had a massive ego and treated a lot of his female models like crap. He had a habit of screwing his young female models, making babies with them and abandoning the girl. He did this over and over. He was a great painter, but a lot of people who knew him well said he was an awful human being.

Many actors are narcissistic. If you think about it all of the performing arts, especially film, lend themselves to narcissism. They attract narcissists and then the nature of being a performer on a stage of some sort in and of itself drives a lot more narcissism. If they get famous, that drives even more narcissism. At some point it is probably an endless feedback loop. My mother said all actors are narcissists and she said you have to be narcissistic to be an actor. There is an old joke where the journalist has been interviewing the actor. It has gone on for 45 minutes of the actor going and on about himself enjoying the sound of his own voice. At some point, he realizes his violation and tries to rectify it.

After 45 minutes:

“But anyway, enough about me. Let’s talk about you now. What did you think of my latest movie?”

Get it?

Am I insufferable? God no! I am not an NPD! I don’t even think I am all that narcissistic. I cannot stand pathological narcissists. The idea that I might be one of these people I hate so much pisses me off. I have a not of problems, but that ain’t one of them. Nobody calls me that. I used to get called arrogant, but I have been working on that one really hard. I have to work on that a part of the time when I am around people, but I cannot manage it pretty well by faking it and getting underneath people.

I do not have a lot of disdain for the people I meet in day to day stuff. Most of them seem like decent enough people even if I do not wish to make personal friends of them. There are some lowlife ghetto types around here who I dislike, but they deserve to be hated, and I do not waste time thinking about them anyway.

I have been called a lot of things, but insufferable is not one of them. However, people do remark that I have a big ego, that I have have some egotism, etc. I have had some complaints that I am vain, conceited, self-impressed, etc., but that is just a vibe you will get from my mind. You will not find me talking like that because I am not a braggart and a showoff and I hate people like that. If I do have some impressive accomplishment I wish to divulge, I have the art of false modesty down to a T, so I can relate things that would normally seem like bragging, but nobody gets upset because it seems like I am embarrassed or ashamed of this accomplishment of mine. It’s an act, but so what?

I do not care if people dislike the vain, conceited, self-impressed vibes I give off. As far as I am concerned, they should feel that way too! Everyone should think they’re great! Start being great today! What are you waiting for?

I hate insufferable people. They are often quite impressed with the sound of their own voices too and they can be downright soporific when they go on one of their endless narcissistic monologues. It’s all just too much, the whole thing. It’s way over the top and typically even offensive. You often want to leave the room when they are going on and on. Of course they cannot see anything wrong with their behavior and they will barely even notice if you walk out. You’re not part of the Me Show anyway. You’re the audience. Some of the audience is leaving before the performance is over. No big, this happens all the time. They have for all intents and purposes little to no insight into their behavior.

I think narcissism is a tendency a lot of us have to watch out for. Just go look at some pathological narcissists, figure out why you can’t stand them and use that as a model for how not to be. Watch yourself on a regular basis to make sure you are not falling into that lousy mindset. Narcissists suck, and a lot of people hate them for good reason. Do you want to suck? Do you want to be widely hated for being an insufferable ass? That’s terrible! I would be ashamed and embarrassed if I acted like that.

24 Comments

Filed under Art, Celebrities, Cinema, Homosexuality, Literature, Music, Narcissism, Novel, Personality, Psychology, Rock, Sex

The AltLeft “Tea Party,” by Rabbit

The AltLeft “Tea Party”

Very nice new article about the Alt Left from Rabbit. I actually still like Rabbit. He is apparently not happy at with Trump. He described most of Trump’s Cabinet picks as “cringey” which is at the very least how I feel about them. Actually to me they are more like “”homicidal rage-inducing” but at this point, that’s a bit of a quibble. Rabbit is on the same page with all the rest of the Left on Trumpism except on the broad race, immigration and possibly trade policy stuff. But he already seems to be selling out the trade stuff horrendously. He’s selling out the immigration stuff too. Too bad the Mexicans aren’t going to pay for the wall. You and me are! Out of our pockets into the mitts of one of one of Trump’s billionaire pals via a rigged no-bid contract. Reverse Robin Hood again, but Reverse Robin Hood is all Trumpism is about anyway. Think about it. Real hard now.

and I don’t see how he could be given Rabbit’s base political beliefs. A lot of the rest of the left wing of the Alt Right has gone over to Trumpism, and to me, that’s all I need to sever ties with them once and for all.

The thing about Rabbit is the same thing that everyone gets wrong about the Alt Left. Rabbit is a Leftist, dammit. He really is a leftwinger. He’s a man of the Left. So many people just cannot wrap their heads around that. If you look at his views across the board, Rabbit is leftwing on just about everything but race and the Cultural Left, and even on the Cultural Left, he is with them on a lot more things than I am. Rabbit holds traditional leftwing notions on sexual orientation, gender identity, feminism, etc. He’s not a social conservative at all. In fact, he is to the left of me on a lot of that stuff. On the other hand, he seems personally red-pilled and he spent a lot of time in the Manosphere and the MGTOW movement before he drifted into the Alt Left.

If he’s leftwing on about everything but race and PC Culture, how the hell is he a rightwinger? I don’t see how missing one check box on the leftwing list of beliefs throws you out of the Left. Suppose we say Rabbit cannot be on the Left due to his views on race (a common notion). In fact, we say, his racial views make him a rightwinger no matter what else gets thrown into the mix. Ok, fine, cast him out.

He’s back over on the Right now. Rabbit gets handed the rightwing checklist. Whereas with the Left he failed to check one box, with the Right he fails to check 95% of the boxes. And somehow he’s rightwing? Forget it. Getting beyond left and right is said to be a well known trope of fascism, but so what? Maybe we do need to get beyond left and right and maybe we don’t have to be fascists to do that. In fact, the Alt Left is precisely all about getting beyond Left and Right to some extent, although we are still mostly on the Left. There’s nothing inherently wrong with heterogeneous politics, and this represents your average person’s views anyway. Homogeneous politics is synonymous with ideologues, and who needs them. Give me a sui generis heterogeneous political mix versus any sort of ideologue any day of the week.

Whatever you think of his stand on race, I believe that Rabbit is a very important thinker in our movement, and besides, let’s get real, race is only part of the package Rabbit is selling. You can still buy a custom package minus the race part. Furthermore, he is a superior chronicler and opinion-maker in our movement as a whole, and Rabbit doesn’t care if you don’t agree

It’s not often discussed, but I also like his media criticism, most of which centers around movie reviews. He has a quirky sense there too, focusing on films from the 1970’s. His architectural musings are also quite good, though I don’t know much about the subject. And there’s something about a guy who unironically lionizes Charles Manson

I also very much like his prose and also a lot of his quirky worldview. I am trained as an editor and Rabbit’s prose is what we call “clean copy.” You needn’t mark it up at all, and he’s saying it better than you the editor could anyway. The rules of English punctuation are quite arcane, and 95% of Americans screw them up. Rabbit’s pretty much got them down. You would think he was a J-major.

But as far as a writer goes, he is one of the finest writers in our movement. He’s a great writer! He should be published, and in fact, I believe he is just now as he deserves to be. As a writer, most of what I read is not really great writing. Only maybe 10% of the time do you read prose on the Net that truly sings right off the page. I don’t know if he’s better than I am, but it’s awful close. It’s at least a tossup, and that’s a compliment, as I dislike most other writers.

As long as he keeps away from racial slurs, his prose is worth it for the political theory and just for the pure aesthetic pleasure of it.

A lot of people want to throw Rabbit out of the movement. Funny because he just about co-founded it. Thing is, Rabbit ain’t going anywhere, nor should he. He’s staying right where he is whether we like it or not. Rabbit is stuck with the Alt Left, and we are stuck with him. We are stuck onto each other like damned remoras. And perhaps after all that is just as it should be.
teapartyalice

I know what you’re thinking, but no, I don’t mean “Tea Party” in the sense of the happy meal conservative movement that emerged in the early part of the Obama administration. Nor am I referring to anything relating to the Boston Tea Party or the American revolution.

I’m talking about the AltLeft and how for me it has come to resemble the tea party in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (1972 version of course!) This film was always on HBO in the mid 1980s, even though it came out in the early 70s. I believe the reason they began to re-air it in the 80s was because the star, Fiona Fullerton, had grown up and re-emerged as a Bond girl in “A View to a Kill,” which came out in 1985.

Anyway, when I first got involved with the AltLeft about a year and a half ago, in my mind it was always meant to augment the AltRight, not outright oppose it. It was a way to view and examine the affects of multiculturalism and political correctness from a cultural and economically left lens as well as from a secular and futurist perspective rather than the radical traditionalist, socially conservative one that dominates rightwing circles. In other words, recognizing the implicit Whiteness that underpins the identities of progressive cities like Seattle or Portland, and asserting that it must become explicit to some degree in order for those places to maintain their culture, aesthetic and quality of life.

It was to put forth the idea that someone can be pro-White without the albatross of traditionally conservative culture, pre-modern aesthetics, capitalist economics, or widely accepted Republican historical dogma (“the 60s were bad,” “Vietnam draft dodgers were traitors,” “McCarthy was right,” “I hate modern architecture,” etc.)

If you hang around rightwing groups for any period of time, you’ll find they have an assumed historical narrative that informs many of their beliefs. I say “assumed,” because they just take it for granted that everyone who agrees with them one issue such as race also accepts their historical framing of a wide range of other issues such as economic systems, religious beliefs, or aesthetic preferences (just as someone on the “Left” might assume that anyone who supports trans rights and raising the minimum wage automatically accepts the idea that racial diversity is always a good thing.) Not everyone buys the package deal.

manson

Unfortunately, the AltLeft has instead attracted a wide range of bizarre characters, each with their own zany ideas about what the AltLeft should represent. Many of them never read any of the original manifestos that I or Robert Lindsay or anyone else wrote or bothered to do any research. They just started using the term like they’d started a new band without checking to see if some other band was already using the name. That would be understandable if this were the pre-Internet days, but it seriously only takes like two seconds to Google. Others actually did thoroughly read this site and somehow managed to come to the conclusion their peculiar ideology was compatible with mine, despite it being a complete mystery to me what exactly was the point of agreement.

The AltLeft has come to attract all kinds of eccentric personalities, each one adhering to their own pet belief system. Worse than that, many have joined the AltLeft for the purpose of militantly opposing the AltRight, which is something I never intended to do (hence the reason I still use the tagline “the left wing of the AltRight.”) Though I disagree with him on a few ideological points…I happen to support Richard Spencer, and I have defended him numerous times when certain squeamish (and often prudish) factions as well as a few prominent figures of the AltRight unsuccessfully tried to throw him under the bus.

So when I interact with other people in the incoherent “movement” known as the AltLeft, it feels a lot like the sitting down at the tea party in Alice in Wonderland. It’s a group of outlandish castouts, contrarians, and vagabonds that have little in creatural commonality other than their politically idiosyncratic tendencies and behavioral eccentricities. Part of me finds this demoralizing, wondering why I ever bothered going down this rabbit hole and whether I can just climb out and forget the whole adventure. Yet the other part of me just embraces the gathering of this zany cast of characters for the sheer chaos that they have unleashed as we bounce off-the-wall ideas past each other and revel at the sight confounded normies that stumble into our world.

5 Comments

Filed under Cinema, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Democrats, Economics, Fascism, Feminism, Gender Studies, Left, Liberalism, Man World, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Republicans, Sane Pro-White, US Politics, Vanity, Writing

Jack Nicholson Has Still Got Game

Jennifer Lawrence after winning Best Actress at the Oscar (former Academy) Awards. Look at her. She’s blushing like a schoolgirl. Old Jack was 76 years old when this video was taken, and the old dog’s still got Game. Incredible. She must be half his age. I so want to be like this if I ever make it this far.

1 Comment

Filed under Celebrities, Cinema, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Sex, Women

“Review of ‘The OA’ series on Netflix,” by Magneto

Review of The OA series on Netflix

by Magneto

I just finished binge watching the 8-episode new series The OA on Netflix and have mixed feelings. It begins by telling an extremely complex tale about a young girl who got adopted from Russia and then kidnapped by a doctor who was researching Near Death Experiences. It drags this story through about seven episodes, but in the 8th episode everything falls apart, and it ends in an incredibly stupid way that leaves you with a lot of questions and no answers.

I will admit that the story is very well written, and it’s a unique series compared to 99% of what is on television today, but after finishing the 8th episode, it feels like the authors were trying too hard to come across as overly deep and complex.

To be honest, I don’t have a fucking clue what the series was even about. There’s a new style of storytelling, both in movies and TV shows, where the writers try to come across as super-metaphysical and deep and merely try to get you to feel strong emotions rather than actually telling a cohesive story. It’s an interesting writing style, but in the end, it feels meaningless because you realize that there was no point at all in the story. Even worse is when the story is written so vaguely and incoherently that you don’t have any idea what the story was about.

My conclusion is that the writers of the series wove together a bunch of random concepts, and in the end, they tried to give some meaning to the chaos of their story. They’ve retroactively tried to put a spin on it by calling it deep, philosophical, spiritual, etc, but in the end it is just a bunch of “beautiful bullshit” as The Atlantic article described it.

It’s been compared to another very strange series called Stranger Things, which I have still yet to watch, but I’ll get around to it after this.

My advice to the writers or to any other scriptwriter is that it’s okay to make your story complex and even a bit confusing, but you need to resolve the majority of the questions that you have brought up. Leaving viewers hanging with a million unanswered questions makes you look like a fool who wrote a bunch of random bullshit and then tried to paint it as deep and intellectual. It’s time to stop trying so hard to be artsy and unique and go back more towards the traditional way of storytelling where you tell a story that follows a normal timeline, progresses through it’s story, however complex or simple it may be, and then ends with the majority of the plot points resolved. Enough with the New Age Modern Art crap, okay?

5 Comments

Filed under Cinema, Guest Posts, Writing

Bob Dylan, “I Want You”

In honor of Bob Dylan winning the Nobel Prize for Literature!

From Blonde on Blonde, double album, 1966. Possibly his best album ever.

A truly great song. From the soundtrack of Cinema Paradiso, Guiseppe Tornato. Great Italian cinema from the 1980’s. As good as Dylan! Italian directors have made some of the greatest movies of all time, and the 1960’s-1980’s were their heyday.

Up there with the French New Wave, who they may have matched. Godard or Fellini? Last Year at Marienbad or The Garden of the Fitzi-Continis? Who could pick?

Thank you Bobby Dylan!

25 Comments

Filed under Cinema, Europe, Music, Regional, Rock

Robert Stark Interviews Rabbit about Futurism

Here.

Great interview. Rabbit is now a regular co-host on Stark’s program, which is great because it gives the Alternative Left more publicity. Also it seems to imply that Stark himself is identifying as Alt Left! Yay! And maybe more of Stark’s guests will start identifying as Alt Left. Wow, looks like we could really start to grow a movement here. I have noticed that Stark’s guests have become more Third Positionists or even “Alt Left-like” in recent months. It’s a great trend!

Really cool interview with Rabbit. Rabbit and Stark discuss me in the last 10 minutes of the show. Rabbit says he thinks that I am afraid to take much of a stand on race because I am afraid of being called a racist. You know what? He is right! I do not want my Alt Left wing to be associated with any sort of real, hardcore racism at all. Forget it. On the other hand, race realism, cultural critique and just straight up honest talk about race is fine.

If it’s just SJW’s calling me racist, I don’t care because they call everyone racist who doesn’t buy the lunatic Cultural Left line on race. And the modern anti-racist movement can burn in Hell. That said, racism does exist and at some point, you are just being a flat out nasty, ugly racist. That sort of thing is wincingly repellent and unacceptable in my book.

Rabbit’s Alt Left wing is much bigger on race, especially being pro-White, than I am. Rabbit for all intents and purposes is some sort of a leftwing White nationalist, or at least he is not afraid to hobnob with such folks. That’s fine for him, but I am going to have to pass. I am not into primarily emphasizing race and I am not a White nationalist. If you are more into being Alt Left in a ore explicitly pro-White sense, then  maybe you want to identify with Rabbit’s wing. Sadly, he does not have a comments section.

In his favor though, I will say that I think Rabbit is a brilliant thinker and a fine writer, and he’s doing something that has needed to be done for a long time.

To me, Alt Left means more left on economics and moderate on social issues (in between the insane Cultural Left and the regressive social conservatives). However, I would still accept people who are economically left and socially conservative. That actually describes a lot of the working class right there and we need to quite turning these people off and shoving them towards the Republican Party.

Rabbit blogs at AltLeft.com

Topics include:
Filippo Tommaso Marinetti & Italian Futurism.
Marinetti’s Manifesto of Futurism.
How Futurism emphasized speed, technology, youth, and violence, and objects such as the car, the aeroplane, and the industrial city.
How Hitler’s exhibition on “degenerate art” included Marinetti and other futurists’ work.
Italian Futurism’s connection to fascism and how that led to its marginalization.
How despite that, Italian Futurism had a major influence on culture, art, and architecture, including Cubism and Art Deco.
Antonio Sant’Elia and his Futurist urban vision which inspired the films Metropolis and Blade Runner.
Constantin von Hoffmeister’s National Futurism.
Guillaume Faye’s Archeofuturism.
Transhumanism.
A Short Trip through the Long View.

Leave a comment

Filed under Art, Cinema, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Economics, Europe, Fascism, Italy, Left, Political Science, Politics, Race Realism, Racism, Regional, Republicans, Sane Pro-White, US Politics, White Nationalism

Robert Stark Interviews Ray Sawhill

Great interview. A bit too conservative for my tastes, and he is obviously very much into money and moneyed people, which is another major turnoff to me, but besides that, I found this interview very much worth listening to. Very smart guy and talks about a lot of things of relevance to this blog.

Interview here.

Ray Sawhill worked as an arts and culture reporter for Newsweek. He has also written for Salon.com and blogs at Uncouth Reflections as Paleo Retiree. He splits his time between New York and Santa Barbara.

Topics include:

How Robert and Ray both have personal connections to Santa Barbara and how the city is almost too idyllic.
Crime fiction novelist Ross Macdonald whose work captures Santa Barbara.
Santa Barbara as a place with strict zoning laws that was modeled after Andalusia in Spain.
The contrast between life in Santa Barbara and New York City.
How New York City has changed in Ray’s time there in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s.
How cuisine is the one area that has seen increased innovation in New York.
Ray’s cameo in the film Exposed set in New York in 1983 staring Nastassja Kinski.
How films such as Exposed and Taxi Driver are documentaries for New York in that era.
The new peculiarly-shaped skyscrapers going up in New York today.
“See through buildings” where wealthy foreigners are buying up real estate in New York and leaving them empty.
How Ray is drawn to architecture because it is art you can experience and changes the world in a way that regular art doesn’t.
How most of the general public has little input and interest in architecture.
How places without zoning laws tend to lack any aesthetic value.
How the main rule in urbanism is not to do anything that harms the city.
Art Deco and how it succeeds in bringing tradition into one.
Architectural Revivalism which seeks to recreate older forms of architecture
Robert Stark’s Artwork.
Ray’s work at Newsweek as a reporters covering art, culture, literature, film, and theatre.
How Ray’s most significant interviews were with writers Philip Roth and John Updike, filmmakers Francis Coppola and Robert Altman and architect Christopher Alexander.
How conservatives tend to avoid culture and leave that domain to the Left.
English Philosopher Roger Scruton as a model for a cultured conservative.
Front Porch Anarchist Bill Kauffman.
New Urbanism.
The The Retro Cocktail and Locavore movements.
James Howard Kunstler.
Ray’s involvement with Environmentalism and Bioregional Anarchism.
How the environmental movement abandoned the overpopulation issue due to political correctness and mass immigration.
The Alternative Right.
How the real political divide is between globalism and decentralization
Cultural trends and how Ray views himself as a cultural radar.
The trend towards a focus on muscles for young men and men are more self-conscious about their bodies.
The value of pleasure and leisure.
Erotica and the debate about what’s art and what’s pornography.
Controversial nude photographer Jock Sturges, who Ray interviewed.
How society is a taking contradictory paths towards lewdness and prudishness.
Students Still Sweat, They Just Don’t Shower.
How having taste and style has become equated with homosexuality.
Young women moving to New York City because of Sex and the City.
Sex Scenes which is a raunchy, satirical audio entertainment that Ray created with his wife playwright Polly FrostCheck it out.

 

5 Comments

Filed under Art, California, Cinema, Conservatism, Culture, Environmentalism, Europe, Gender Studies, Homosexuality, Immigration, Left, Literature, Man World, Northeast, Philosophy, Photography, Political Science, Politics, Pornography, Regional, Sex, Sociology, Spain, Urban Studies, USA, West

Even Better Than #whitelivesmatter

How bout some nihilism?

#nolivesmatter

I like it already!

I came out of the punk rock movement where most of us had the attitude of, “Decline of Western Civilization? Cool! What can I do to help?”, so I’ve had a soft spot in my black heart for nihilism since my salad days.

Modern SJW culture is getting pretty damned nihilistic if you actually sit down and think about it. Who knows, maybe in 20 years, narodniks will be in style again. After all they killed the Czar, and that’s impressive.

Maybe we are already there. Nietzsche is the quintessential modernist. Who else can speak to our age? He said we were already trapped in a nihilistic black hole, and that was a hundred years ago.

Why else is Buddhism, the original nihilistic religion, so popular with hipsters these days?

What else could you call postmodernism but nihilism enshrined in the academy and intellectual? Derrida is Nietzsche updated to a new century. From there we move on to Lyotard and especially Baudrillard, and then it’s a hop and skip to Badiou and especially Brassier, the echoing voice in the darkness of the black hole of our time.

The art world was never far behind, or maybe even out in front.

Sade was scribbling in his dungeon a century before Nietzsche rocked the world.

While narodniks were throwing bombs, Turgenev and Chekhov were following them in the literature of the time.

From there we went to Dada, which is nihilistic or it is nothing at all, or perhaps it is both or neither, which all mean the same thing if you think about it.

Ayn Rand hated nihilism, which is funny considering that Objectivism is about as nihilistic as you can get. I mean come on. Religion is dead, so it obviously follows that God is too. No religion, no God. That’s not too hard to understand. Without God, there is nothing, and that is our postmodern predicament du jour. Sartre would call it a “dilemma.” It certainly creates a lot of angst. Look at all the people on psych meds.

Hilariously, the Objectivists look out at the world with their cold sociopathic dead shark eyes and call their evil ways a temple. “God may be dead, but it matters not,” they cheer. “For we have money, and in money we have more meaning than a thousand Gods!” Yeah. Let’s all go pray at the bank. Maybe they’ll give me a loan.

It’s such pitiful thinking until you realize probably half the US population are Randists. Then it becomes frightening, yet another dangerous popular delusion.

And no, money is not a substitute for meaning. All the meaning in my wallet and a $1.79 will get you a Slurpee at a 7-11.

Money is God! Surely you jest. But our Randists do not, and that’s scary. Serial killer scary.

Music was a bit late to the game, but as mentioned above, nihilism was Punk Rock’s middle name. Probably the Velvets were the incubators, and then the Pistols blew it up for the world to see. Punk is nihilistic to this day, assuming it’s not commodified yet.

Industrial, Black metal, death metal, and doom metal took the ex nihilo baton from punk and ran with it. Black Sabbath were the Velvets of metal. Metallica, Slayer, Alice in Chains, Ministry, Motorhead, Nine Inch Nails, Pantera and especially Marilyn Manson blazed a trail of destructive nothingness that rages to this moment.

Film was even later to game, but the movies always catch up to culture eventually. It’s a law, written in stone on Hollywood Boulevard. The Big Lebowski was the first step, and what is Fight Club but nihilistic? The Matrix and its sequel probably wrote the ultimate cinematic treatise on our modern disease. What’s with that hollowed out book in Thomas A. Anderson’s hand? And what’s Agent Smith ranting about anyway, or is he really just ranting about nothing?

More recently, the Joker in himself  in Dark Knight Rises is none other than the Agent of Chaos. With no love of money, he wants nothing to do with filthy lucre. He only wants to make everything burn. In the ultimate anti-Objectivist statement, he even burns a gigantic pile of money.

Most people troll on the Net, but some hardcores troll in real life. That’s called Trolling IRL. At the moment, that is exacting what Mr. Trump is doing – trolling IRL. That silly billionaire is trolling the whole damn world.

Some folks who troll IRL are harmless like Andy Kaufman, probably the finest IRL troller that ever lived.

Others who troll IRL are downright evil. I can’t help thinking that Adolf Hitler was trolling the world with his crazy philosophy. Unfortunately, this mad trolling IRL episode left 50 million bodies in its wake.

James Holmes was another evil IRL troller, though he was a mere piker next to Der Fuhrer. Nevertheless, this exemplary philosopher/man of action understood The Dark Knight movie at its essence. Hence he dressed up as the Joker and crashed a movie theater in Colorado, spraying the packed crowd with machine gun fire, trying to make the world burn in his own petty and failed way.

And our trajectory of nothingness, with all its bumps and lurches along the way, leads us here, to our modern nightmare. In the ultimate act of nihilism, a man dressed up as the Joker, the Agent of Chaos himself and raided a movie theater with a machine gun in a failed attempt to set the world aflame, in a nightmarish act of horrific violence utterly devoid of all meaning.

And here I leave you, dear reader, staring off into space, looking at nothing at all.

Have a good trip, if you can bear it.

124 Comments

Filed under American, Art, Cinema, Crime, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Literature, Music, Philosophy, Punk, Religion, Rock

Bigfoot News Holidays 2015 Edition

10341556_714893888556324_4393432724569907143_n

Honestly, I do not have the foggiest idea what that is. But the more I look at it, the more I think that is a Sasquatch. Look at that thing. It has no neck!

bigfoot-close2

This is from Maine. The Tom Pasanen photo. Whatever it is, it sure is weird.

 

bigfoot-maine-tim-pasanen-cropped

The Tom Pasanen photo from Maine.

 

bigfoot-close1

A closer look at the bizarro Pasanen photo. Do note how the hair coloration of the thing matches the foliage perfectly.

 

fake bigfoot

A fake by hoaxers associated with the JREF scum, I do not know what that is – is it a statue, a costume? I think it is statue.

 

Bigfoot-Caught-Running-Through-The-Bush-On-Trail-Cam-620x270

What in the Hell is that?! Shot via a trailcam and entered into a contest. I am not sure if it won or not. I have no idea what that is. If that is a wild animal, would someone please prove it? That doesn’t look like a bear. Nevertheless, part of me thinks this is an animal. I always thought that this is one of the weirdest Bigfoot pictures out there.

 

gokart

Three photos here of three Sasquatches. The first is from the Go-cart video. Boys racing go-carts in Pennsylvania had a Go-Pro camera on their go-cart and shot a video of this thing. They did not even see it at the time and only found out later when they looked at the footage. If you see the video, that can be nothing other than a Sasquatch. I believe those boys, and I do not think they are sophisticated enough to pull off an elaborate hoax like this. In fact, I doubt if anyone is. I have never seen a hoax that matches the quality of this video. Photo 2 is apparently from the Turkey Hunter footage. Is that correct? Someone correct me if I am wrong. I do think that the Turkey Hunter footage is genuine. However, the Turkey Hunter video is also one of the most flat- out weird Bigfoot videos I have ever seen. The last is I think an old one from Alberta Canada, but I am not sure. That sure looks like a Sasquatch to me.

 

jim-stanley2-2

Ok, that is just weird. Someone tell me what the Hell that is? Look at how long that thing’s arms are. It looks like a gorilla. But compare it to the very first photo at the top. Same scene, right? The first photo is the thing when it stood up and the second photo is the same object crouching down. If it’s the same creature as the first video, that’s a Sasquatch. I believe that the man who shot this pic and some other related ones is known. What do we know about him?

 

10482326_933982693297266_6737918031358340551_n

This is up there with the craziest Bigfoot photos of all time. We have seen these things carrying deer in the Turkey Hunter video, and now we see a Bigfoot carrying…yes, you got it. A cow. Apparently a dead cow, unless the Bigfoot just killed it. A completely baffled farmer in Indiana submitted this pic, which was taken with a trailcam. He has no idea what this is a picture of. He doesn’t seem to be the type to fake a video, and where do you get fake cow carcasses anyway!? Note the corn to be harvested in the foreground.

 

ohiophoto

A much larger photo of the Bigfoot with the cow. Note the huge foot on that thing! No way did some humble farmer buy a fake cow carcass and dress his farmer friend up in a suit, put on the biggest clown clown shoes I have ever seen and shoot this with a trailcam, of all things. That simply did not happen. Have we even seen a trailcam hoax yet? I don’t believe the hoaxers even try to do those. Would be nice to get a better backstory on this.

 

Sas Ontario other BFt

Sasquatch Ontario capture of a Sasquatch. Probably genuine.

Brave Hunter Films Massive Bigfoot! Utah 2015. This video is getting ripped to pieces by the skeptards, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that I really do think this is a Sasquatch. It doesn’t move like a man. No man can move like that. It’s not possible.

Do you see how it goes down on all fours a few times? See how many times it hides behind trees and peeks from behind them (tree peaking). Notice how it moves through the forest like a cross-country skier, gliding as it walks? Humans can’t walk like that. Also look at how it gracefully goes up-down, up-down when it walks. Humans don’t walk like that, nor can they.

Notice also the way it grabs trees and brush as it moves through the forest, using the foliage almost as one might use ski poles? That’s how they move through the woods. At one point in the video, you can clearly see that that thing has no damned neck! Furthermore, its shoulders are simply massive.

And a number of times you can see its head and face in profile. Look at the bone structure of that face. That’s not a human face. Human faces are not shaped like that, and you can’t put a monkey mask on that gives your face a different shape. Have we seen a Bigfoot hoax yet with a mask so fancy that it actually changes the shape of the wearer’s face?

It has a browridge. A coned head. How many hoaxes have we seen with coned heads and bony browridges? Notice the weird way it walks hunched over. That’s not a human being. Humans don’t walk like that.

In addition, I have seen so many videos of these damned things by now that I can almost spot a Sasquatch half a mile away blindfolded. They have a certain profile about the bodies. It takes many different forms, but I keep seeing those forms over and over. And no human has a body profile that looks like that, nor can they fake one.

That’s also real fur. You can see that in the very beginning of the video when the sun is shining on the object.

Also if that is a guy in a monkey suit and a mask, there is no way he could move through the woods that fast. Also the mask is going to get so hot towards the end of the video that he is going to have to take it off or else he is going to die.

The hunter’s reaction has been criticized, with people saying that he seems calm. Like Hell he does. You can hear him breathing hard right from the start of the video. He’s hyperventilating. You don’t breathe like that when you are calm.

First video evidence of a Sasquatch at the Alberta Habituation Site! In the video below, we see an episode of Survivorman where Survivorman is looking for Sasquatches up in Todd Standing’s research area, which is the Alberta Habituation Site (wherever precisely that might be) last time I checked. I am pretty out of the loop with regards to the AHS, though I have sent a couple of guys out there looking for it. I definitely know the general area of the site within 25 miles or so.

Anyway, whether or not Todd is still at the site, I know for a fact that the Survivorman episodes where Survivorman is romping around searching for Sasquatches with Todd Standing were absolutely filmed at the AHS in the last couple of years.

This footage is fascinating. Apparently at the time the video was shot, neither Todd nor Survivorman had any idea that a Sasquatch was  spying on them in the distance of the footage.

In fact, it was not until the footage aired on live TV that viewers looking closely at the footage noted what appeared to a Sasquatch spying on Todd and Survivorman from a couple hundred yards in the background. Todd and Survivorman apparently had no idea that this Sasquatch was in the footage until the episode aired on TV! This makes me think that there is no way that this is another Todd Standing hoax.

If it’s a hoax, how come Todd even know about it himself? And why would Todd secretly put a hoaxed guy in a monkey suit in the footage and not tell anyone about it? Todd’s too much of a narcissist and a loudmouth. If he thought there was as Sasquatch in his footage, he would be yelling so loud you could hear him in outer space.

Anyway, my last sources in Canada told me that the word is that Todd is done with hoaxing. There’s no need to hoax anymore, as he has a primo habituation site with real live Sasquatches running around. So why hoax?

u

Todd Standing’s Early Sasquatch Video. Yes, this is one of the famous ones that people talk about a lot, but you hardly ever see it. Before Todd started hoaxing the world with his made-up stories about the Land of the Lost in British Colombia (a place you can only get to by tunnel) where he was surrounded by Sasquatches one night in his camp. Remember Todd made a movie out of that?

Before Todd’s infamous Tiki dolls that fooled so many otherwise sane people. Remember the puppets made of Todd’s face morphed into a monkey man by his special effects artist sister?

Yes, before then, Todd shot 2-3 very blurry early videos that caused a lot of controversy. In the case of this one (possibly the first video), I think that is actually a real Sasquatch. For one thing, that looks like real fur, not a costume.

Anyway, that slope on the other side is so remote and steep that I don’t understand how the guy in the monkey suit even climbed the mountain in the first place. And that does look like a Sasquatch. And it moves like one. And the people filming seem genuinely excited (rapid breathing, etc.) Anyway, I do think Todd got one here.

Frightened farmer films massive Bigfoot. North Georgia 2015. Another new one, and yes, I like it a lot. Look at the way it glides through the forest. Look at the way it moves backwards to get behind that tree. Look at how huge it is when it finally stands up. Doesn’t it remind you of that Provo, Utah Sasquatch filmed by the college kids camping out for the weekend?

Notice it has no neck. Notice the coned heard. Note the massive body. I also believe once again that this is real fur, not a costume. And yes, you can tell the difference. There are certain things about real fur that have been impossible to replicate with costumes. And there are a couple of other things that the hoaxers never get right that I will not reveal.

Bigfoot Caught on Fisherman’s Video. I like this one too. Another new one from 2015. The fisherman didn’t notice it at the time, and he only saw the Sasquatch after he got home and was looking at the footage. I also think that is real fur, not a costume. The costume makers have never gotten the fur thing right because they can’t.

Melba Ketchum’s DNA results independently replicated by another scientist! I ran this one a while back based on a video Melba made in which she said another team had replicated her results, but I did not know the details on it. I also said that another “scientific team” replicated the results because that’s how I understood the story. However now that I have more details, I can report that it was not an actual scientific team; instead it was simply another scientist who sequenced the genome on his own in his own lab based on Melba’s data.

The other scientist’s name is Dr. David Swenson, and he is a very famous geneticist along the lines of the rather infamous Dr. Sykes in the UK. Swenson is not as famous as Sykes, but who is? And how famous are even the most famous geneticists? Walk up to the average person on the street and ask them to name a famous geneticist. I bet they cannot name even one.

Anyway, Swenson is pretty well known in the scientific geneticist community because he was the first person to sequence the genome of the Staph Aureus bacteria. He has authored over 125 peer-reviewed papers in scientific genetics journals. That is a very impressive record.

Swenson was interviewed by Joe Rogan in the video below.  Now what Swenson did was he took Ketchum’s raw data and sequenced the genome himself based on that. He focused on a single chromosome, chromosome 13.

He was able to completely replicate Ketchum’s results based on just looking at that one chromosome. He said it had a mix of human and nonhuman characteristics. He described it as a hybrid, and he said that at one time, some other creature must have bred with a human being (he felt that the other creature had to be a male, and it had to breed with a human female).

Rogan, incredulous, asked if it was possible that the results were faked by Ketchum. Swenson shook his head and said “You can’t fake DNA. There’s no way to do it. DNA is DNA.” As Swenson notes, this Sasquatch genome contains much genetic material that is completely unknown to man. You can’t fake that. You can’t make up new genetic sequences. There’s no way to do it. It’s utterly irrational, and it’s not even possible.

This however is the argument that the retards in our community (99% of the Bigfoot community is retarded) have been making. Yes, that is their argument: Ketchum faked the results.

The other retarded argument that they make is that the results were contaminated, but Ketchum has conclusively proved that the results were not contaminated. Anyway, even if they were contaminated, you would not get a result like this.

If, say, the results of the Sasquatch samples were really of bears, contamination would result in a finding of human + bear. So even if Ketchum’s material was contaminated, the results would just be horse + human, bear + human, racoon + human, etc. You follow? So the contamination argument is about as retarded as the hoaxing argument.

At one point, Swenson said, “There is an unknown mammal in the Pacific Northwest.” A stunned Rogan again asked Swenson later in the interview, “So is this proof that Bigfoot is real?” Swenson started to answer but stopped himself. He paused a bit and said, “Well it seems like it is, but as a scientist, I will not believe these things are real until one tries to bite my hand off.” In other words, Swenson is so incredulous of his own results that he still wants a body.

Unbelievably, the few skeptards who have heard about this new evidence from Dr. Swenson have mockingly laughed it off once again. They don’t care. They simply do not believe these things exist no matter how great evidence we throw in their faces. They, like 85% of the US public and nearly 100% of the scientific community, will not believe us until we show them a body.

All of their arguments about “no credible evidence” are crap. We have excellent video and photos that cannot be faked.

We have over 40,000 documented sightings including some by scientists, university and college professors, psychologists, police officers, wildlife biologists (we have several from them), park rangers, firefighters, forestry officials, and medical professionals. The skeptards laugh all of this off mockingly and say that all of these people are either lying, hallucinating or seeing other things and confusing them with Sasquatches. That argument is so preposterous that it is stupid, but this this is the received knowledge, believe it or not.

We have audio recordings that cannot be faked, hair, scat, footprints, handprints and recently teethmarks. Apparently all of this is either from other animals se we faked it. Recently we even acquired blood and even tissue. And now on top of all of that, we have have good hard genetic evidence. And still they laugh us off. What more do we have to do to prove these things exist to these folks?

Incidentally, Swenson, like so many other well credentialed believers, said that before he sequenced this genome, he had thought that Bigfoot was a hoax or a fraud. He no longer believes that.

Rick Dyer fails to come through. Dyer released two interesting videos recently, supposedly part of a three-part series on the San Antonio shooting incident, in which he apologized for all of his shenanigans and asked forgiveness of everyone for his endless bad behavior. This is par for the course for Rick, and it is nothing new.

He also explained in detail what happened on September 6, 2012 when he allegedly shot and killed a Bigfoot in San Antonio, Texas. This is also interesting, however since Rick has not yet offered any evidence that he committed this deed, this video was not very important in that sense either.

However, he did say one thing that I thought was very interesting. He said that all of the remaining footage that was cut out of Morgan Matthews’ Shooting Bigfoot movie will be released in a new edition of the movie to appear on TV  in December. He said that this remaining footage would prove conclusively that he shot and killed a Bigfoot on that day.

The fact that he was so matter of fact about it and attributed the coming footage to Matthews instead of himself is what caught my eye. I doubt if Rick is making this up off the top of his head. First of all, Rick has never been proven to have told one single lie yet about Morgan Matthews, nor has he made any wild and false predictions about him.

All of this makes me think that the release of the remaining footage by Matthews’ film company Minnow Films has at the very least been discussed if not actually planned and authorized.

It is notoriously hard to get Matthews to make any sort of statement about much of anything, and he has said very little about this movie other than some odd and cryptic statements.

Further and most spectacularly, he has refused to deny Rick’s charges that a Bigfoot was shot and killed in the filming of the movie or that those are actual Bigfoots running around in the footage at the end of the film. This makes no sense at all, and the skeptards as usual have absolutely no explanation for Matthews’ behavior whatsoever except to moronically accuse him of being a hoaxer.

Well, here it is January, December has come and gone, nd nothing happened. It would be very nice if Rick is telling the truth and we could see the rest of the footage that was cut out of Shooting Bigfoot and even nicer if it lent credence to Rick’s continuing claim that he shot a Bigfoot that day in Texas.

Rick also said that the Bigfoot body exists, but he has never had possession of it as the investors took possession of it immediately. He also promised that “this will all come out one day” and that the body would one day appear in public. I believe that if this event occurred, it makes sense that the investors immediately took control of the body.

Furthermore, Rick’s wildly dishonest behavior and scamming for a couple of years after the purported shooting makes sense if he never had the body in his possession. Let’s say the body was never in his possession. What would Rick do, being Rick Dyer? Pretend he had it and run around scamming people about the fake body for as long as he could milk money out of the con job, right? Well of course. After all, Mr. Dyer is an excellent con artist.

Nevertheless, it is important to note that there is still no good hard evidence the Rick killed a Bigfoot that night, although I believe there is excellent evidence that there were two Bigfoots running around in the woods there that eve, one running away from Rick and the other slapping down Morgan.

There is also excellent evidence that Rick was shooting live bullets at that thing with a real gun as per Matthews’ statement confirming those facts. The creature that Rick was shooting at was obviously a Bigfoot, as it could not be anything else. And it really does look like he shot the thing as evidenced by the moan we can hear in the movie. But did he kill it? This is what we don’t know. I would say that there is pretty good evidence that he wounded it though.

Also the thing that swats down Matthews, knocking him out with one mere slap of the land (!?) absolutely has to be a Bigfoot because there is no way that could possibly be a mask or a costume.

Furthermore, keep in mind that both of those things are running around in the woods at night with no flashlights! How does a human stunt man in a monkey suit do that?

So from Shooting Bigfoot, there is excellent evidence that the following things are true:

  1. The Tent Video is a real Bigfoot.
  2. The thing running away from Rick later on is a real Bigfoot.
  3. Rick is firing live ammo at the Bigfoot with a real gun (Matthews’s testimony).
  4. One of the shots appears to have hit the Bigfoot, at the very least wounding it.
  5. Another Bigfoot appears out of nowhere and slaps Matthews down onto the ground with an open palm, knocking him out.

The things that are yet unknown and unproven are:

  1. Rick actually killed that Bigfoot he was chasing with one of his shots.
  2.  Any of the events described by Rick after he supposedly shot the Bigfoot actually occurred.
  3.  A dead Bigfoot was retained, transported and stored anywhere after the shooting.
  4.  Musky Allen, whose testimony has not yet been impeached, actually saw a dead Bigfoot from the shooting at a US government facility in Nevada.
  5. Anyone at all has ever been in possession of a dead Bigfoot from the shooting, much less that anyone currently retains one.

In other words, what we are dealing here with the San Antonio Bigfoot story is once again another Bigfoot body story, of which there have been quite a few down through the years.

So far, good hard evidence of any of these bodies has been lacking, though some of the stories are quite intriguing. It is interesting that in all of these cases, hard proof of the existence of a body has not been forthcoming, yet nevertheless, skeptics have presented absolutely zero evidence that any of the body stories are untrue, frauds or hoaxes other than Rick’s two fake Bigfoot bodies.

We don’t know if any of these body stories are true. None have been proven, and yet none have been disproven either. As with so many things in life, it is simply completely up in the air whether any of the shooting and body stories are true.

In order for Rick to prove his claim, he is going to have to present more evidence in the form of:

  1. Additional footage from the Shooting Bigfoot movie.
  2. A body itself retained, if at all, probably by investors and not Rick.
  3. Any other probitive evidence.

So far, Dyer has failed to present us with this evidence. Until Rick can show us the monkey, this is just another wild Bigfoot story.

27 Comments

Filed under Animals, Apes, Bigfoot, Canada, Cinema, Genetics, Mammals, Midwest, North America, Northeast, Regional, Science, South, Texas, USA, Utah, West, Wild