User talk:152.166.141.253

December 2022
Hello, I'm JCMLuis. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Talk:Bigfoot have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks.  luis .  💬 17:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Hob Gadling

 * Yes, the article definitely needs more peacocking with academic degrees. And shouting. And abolutely no reference to sources. And it needs to ignore the people who know about folklore, instead relying on people handling (but not understanding) high-tech gimmicks that say "beep". Riiight.
 * If you want to improve the article, you need reliable sources. And you cannot replace good logic by calling yourself a doctor. --Hob Gadling (talk) 09:11, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Soooo.... I present FACTUAL ANALYSIS by the experts who were there, and studied the incident, and you EQUATE CAPITOL LETTERS for emphasis with "shouting" 🙄🙄 (obviously a Leftist claiming to be "scientific", then when faced with a scientific challenge... ARGUES SEMANTICS 👏👏👍👍🙄🙄 There's no "logic" needed when scientific analysis is readily available. Your decided LACK of subject knowledge - or most likely much scientific knowledge at all - causes you to argue like a 3 yr old vs stick to the presented factual information and, should you choose to be OWNED, email me privately and GET OWNED.  More 3 yr old banter HOB, or do you have the "scientific balls" to educate your ridiculous ignorance of ANY ASPECT of the subject matter... and OF COURSE claim I'm not a Doctoral Scientist with degrees in biology, chemistry, medicine and 20 yrs experience as a surgeon, and lifelong experience as a professional guide, horseman, tracker and hunter in backcountry wilderness - and seeing tracks on a regular basis EVERY YEAR - that just being in these areas you'd "CRAP" yourself... Mr. Peacock basement computer boy 152.166.141.253 (talk) 17:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions. OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:33, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Disruption, harassment
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. OhNo itsJamie Talk 18:21, 13 December 2022 (UTC)