 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kate1980
Approved
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 258
|
 Posted: October 24th, 2007 06:56 AM |
     |
|
I'm incredibly anxious to hear what RKennedy has to say too, he has tons of personal experience with these creatures.
Kate
Coastal British Columbia exped. 2008
New Hampshire exped. 2008 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rod
Unregistered
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 173
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 07:10 AM |
|
|
geez, who is this guy...everyone is excited, dying to hear, anxious even...someone fill me in.....or is he just going to give his opinion on 2 grainy photos that we all have debated over, over analyzed, and lost sleep over....what am I missing here...
for what its worth |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kate1980
Approved
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 258
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 08:50 AM |
|
|
RKennedy is a pretty well known guy on this board, he is a wealth of knowledge , so I am told. He has quite a bit of experience with these creatures, as does Captainkillmore and I believe Cowboyman. You should search Captainkillmore and RKennedy for their posts, they are excellent reads. I've been trying to call RKennedy but I live near Boston and hes in British Columbia so the time difference makes it hard for me to get a hold of him...:-) I'm usually in bed early cause I need my beauty sleep...lol. Anyways, look up some of their posts....:-)
Kate
Coastal British Columbia exped. 2008
New Hampshire exped. 2008 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mudzillaefi
Unregistered
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 104
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 10:25 AM |
|
|
| I think this is a picture of a ratehr mangy black bear who happens to be standing at the right angle to give the impression of being bipedal. The third photo shows a rather blocky looking round heeled "paw" like a bear has. Bears have no heels as the foot joins the leg in a rounded fashion. The second photo shows the bears head at a slight angle as to not quite show the top of the head and the ears. The third photo to me, does not show an arm pit, but a fold of skin that leads to a bears chest are and not that of a primate. Simply my opinion. The person who took the photos says he had strong deer attractant in this spot by the tree. As both Squatch and bear would deer on a daily basis and should not even give deer smells a second thought. IMO |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beenthereseenthat
Approved
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 324
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 11:01 AM |
|
|
Looking at the photo Wildmanmarty posted above, this is what I see....
The creature still looks like a squatch. It looks like it is responding to the infrared illumination from the camera, essentially turning its eyes and body away from the flash, perhaps from the flash of a photo taken a few seconds earlier.
It is sheltering its eyes by turning its head away from the camera and moving to place it's left shouder between its head and the flash. It has also raised its right arm to shield its eyes, with its right forearm over its eyes and the right hand cupped with its fingers pointed toward the camera.
It's right hand is slightly cupped and the thumb is slackly tucked within the cup. Relax your right hand, let your wrist and fingers go slack, raise your right forearm over your eyes, and you should assume the same general position with your hand. Now look at Wildmanmarty's enlarged photo. You can see four vertically arranged light spots on the hand. Look more closely and you'll see that the bottom two look a lot like fingers. Now look up to the third spot from the bottom or second from the top. You'll be able too see that it is actually two light spots slightly merged. The primary one being the middle finger of the creature's right hand, and just slightly below to the right....the thumbnail within the cupped hand.
I haven't got a clue what the protrusion on the knee is, but I don't think it's the right hand.
If the creature is responding to the flash in picture two, then it makes even more sense that it is trying to assume a camouflaging posture in picture three. Clearly it's been successful at this because it sure has been able to convince a lot of people that it is not a squatch in picture three. If you're looking at a picture of a squatch trying not to look like a squatch, you're probably not going to see a squatch. Beyond this, if you actively try to see something else, you're assisting the squatch in its attempt at camouflage. You are forgetting that it is trying to look like anything else you're willing to make out.
If you're still dead set on picture three looking like a bear, it reminds me of a joke involving a hunter and bear where the bear says as a punchline: "You don't come here for the hunting, do ye Laddie?" |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BS47
Unregistered
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 16
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 11:07 AM |
|
|
| I keep reading about how much interaction rkennedy has with BF, so why aren't we discussing very clear, obvious pics of a BF taken by rkennedy instead of jacobs pics? Rkennedy, if you have undeniable evidence, please share it with the rest of us. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WVSLICK
Approved
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 323
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 11:59 AM |
|
|
I thought Rkennedy was going to contribute a little while back then he just went away. I would like to hear his opinion also. Personally, I dont know how you cannot see the bear. Why would a B.F. assume a position like that if they thought they were seen and not just head for the heavy cover that seems to be just feet away? Can they even see IR flash to know to hide?
RICK R. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mudzillaefi
Unregistered
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 104
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 12:05 PM |
|
|
| There is NO flash with this type of camera. None. The "flap" of skin that extends from the arm to the chest area indicates to me this is a black bear with its thin summer coat or it has some kind of mange. One deciding factor is the presence of the cubs, which would not be there without they're mother. Also the difference in position of the mineral block in the second two pics. this leads me to think that this mother bear, was there licking this block while the first picture was taken. The animal could not have been shielding its eyes from a non-existant flash. It would never have known the camera was there. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WVSLICK
Approved
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 323
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 12:10 PM |
|
|
Thats what I thought, thanks.
RICK R. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beenthereseenthat
Approved
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 324
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 12:16 PM |
|
|
| How much NOISE does the camera make? |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Squatcher
Unregistered
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 12:20 PM |
|
|
How many days have we been discussing this now? 
If it were that obviously a picture of a bear, don't you think that we would have heard from Dr. Meldrum by now?
WVSLICK - rkennedy likes to choose his words carefully. 
Eric Spinner
BFRO Investigator NJ PA DE |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WVSLICK
Approved
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 323
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 12:32 PM |
|
|
Im sure he is a busy man and wants to be thorough, but I think the lightened and outlined pics on here pretty much speak for themselves. I hope we hear something soon so we can put this to bed.
RICK R. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Squatcher
Unregistered
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 12:46 PM |
|
|
We're all busy! This is driving me crazy! I'm not getting my work done! 
OK... I feel better now.
I've talked at length with RK the last couple of nights, and I'm dying here from holding in all that he shared in those conversations. We'll just have to be patient I guess.
Eric Spinner
BFRO Investigator NJ PA DE |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Toledodan
Approved
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 01:06 PM |
|
|
Well If I was RK, I am not sure that I would post, seeing how this board has elevated him to GOD status, lots of pressure to deal with.
Beenthere........thanks for the PI analysis, one might think you were there when the picture was taken. This camera does not have a flash, nor does it make very much noise. If it did, then there would not be two pictures, because a BF would have gotten out of there quick.
Look at the feet. They are awfully short IMO. As a juvenile they should be at least 10" long right? |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Toledodan
Approved
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 01:09 PM |
|
|
Quote:
hovering wrote:
Hi all. A Newbie here. I've been looking at these images quite a bit today. That strange bent over posture in image 3 initially struck me as a limber biped until I realized the front legs/arms looked way too long and the hind legs way too short compared to image 2. After looking at it further, a frontal bear image all of a sudden became clear...
I've attempted to load a Photoshopped JPEG that I hope shows up. Once you see the head staring at you, it seems pretty obvious. The animal's left paw position is pretty odd, but that may be a shadow trick. Let me know what you think.
I've been trying to make the bear "pop out" in image 2 as in image 3, but can't figure out the posture/limb position. Thoughts?
|
How do you square two hind planted feet facing the opposite direction of the supposed head? That is a heck of a contorted pose for any bear to pull off. And how do you describe the black bulge below the head you outlined?? |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WVSLICK
Approved
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 323
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 01:20 PM |
|
|
It looks to me like it could just be shadow from the front left leg, the foot is pointing towards the camera and the leg is casting a small shadow under the bear. And could the bulge under the bear be one of the cubs?
RICK R. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Toledodan
Approved
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 01:24 PM |
|
|
| It is also interesting to see the differences in how the IR catches the fur on the bear - solid dark even coloring and non-reflective, and the "squatch"- blotchy- reflective - not a flat black like the bears. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gazza
Approved
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 325
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 01:41 PM |
|
|
If we were trying to prove the existence of bears instead of squatch (we could still be called the BFRO) then pics 2 and 3 would be very suspect proof of a bear, probably wouldn't even consider it putting the pics on the "we believe bears exist" forum. Most likely just a young sasquatch.
Gary Cronin
Alberta BFRO Investigator
The truth is out there |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jonathan820
Approved
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 265
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:01 PM |
|
|
FYI
Any questions? |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sierraromeodelta
Approved
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:13 PM |
|
|
Looooong time lurker first time poster. I find that I can no longer stay behind the curtain.
I'd love to sell some of you guys oceanfront property in Arizona. Joking of course.
I am more interested in the behavior of everyone since these photos surfaced. I find all of your theories to be very interesting. I also find that I have seen only a few post where people have suggested it might be a hoax, this to me is strange. This should be the first thought. I also think rod has too much time on his hands. Maybe the earth spins slower below the equator. Joking rod.
I am not going to say what I see in the photo, it is of no consequence. I do however think that this photo will not change anything. There are too many variables at play. It is funny though that people think this blurry photo will burst the Sasquatch bubble wide open. If the PG film didn't then how can we expect a blurry distorted weird photo in the age of the most powerful (and cheap) technology to solve the puzzle. It won't. The PG film is all I need to believe. The rest won't ever suffice (beyond finding a real specimen).
I do love hearing all the experts though, you guys make reading fun. My only suggestion is to stop listening to each others guesses and form your own, based on what you know you see. However, if you stare hard enough I bet you can make out anything.
Someone quoted Occam' Razor and I find that interesting. I use it to explain the Saquatch phenomenon. Basically thousands of people can't be liars, one must be telling the truth. This is true for large numbers of people. When presented with one case however, Occam's Razor tells you something far different. The simplest answer is hoax. I am not saying that, I am just laying out some questions that need to be asked.
On a side note I know the brother of the guy who owns the photos runs around on the site. I do not mean to offend him or his brother. Its obvious that it is a question that needs to be asked. So take offense if you want but get used to it because this photo will probably always be controversial.
Also don't bother with the "humans can't bend that way." argument. They can. In fact more people can bend like that than there are probably Saquatch in the wild.
Love the topic and thanks for listening
-SRD
SierraRomeoDelta
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RobertT
Approved
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 18
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:20 PM |
|
|
Hi. This is my first message here beside the introduction thread.
I wonder if this camera is equipped with an I/R lens? Because I/R is a different wavelength, a camera that is focused with a regular lens during the day will show a slightly out of focus image at night when I/R light is used. ( which is I suspect why the images here are a little blurry, but not a lot ).
RT |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Toledodan
Approved
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
jonathan820 wrote:
FYI
Any questions?
|
Sorry. not the same rock in pic #2. look at surrounding sticks and limbs, doesn't line up to where that is the same rock. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wildmanmarty
Unregistered
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 531
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:34 PM |
|
|
I may regret saying this, but if that is a human in a monkey suit, show me the suit and I will eat it.
How old would you be, if you didn't know how old you are? |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BigfootLives!
Approved
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:35 PM |
|
|
So you're thinking it's a fake, Toledodan?
My blog -
Books, Bones, Bricks, and Bullets
http://drpaleophd.blogspot.com/ |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sierraromeodelta
Approved
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:36 PM |
|
|
Quote:
jonathan820 wrote:
OK sierraromeodelta
Here's your hoax pic.
|
Nice analysis, you guys are relentless.
SierraRomeoDelta
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sierraromeodelta
Approved
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
wildmanmarty wrote:
I may regret saying this, but if that is a human in a monkey suit, show me the suit and I will eat it.
|
I don't think they make a sauce for monkey suit, so you may have to use ketchup. Hope thats ok.
-SRD
SierraRomeoDelta
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jonathan820
Approved
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 265
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:39 PM |
|
|
Threw this up once before, but took it off. Just another spoof to add to the chalk board.
See post on 5 & 6.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wildmanmarty
Unregistered
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 531
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:39 PM |
|
|
Let's see the suit first, sierra.
How old would you be, if you didn't know how old you are? |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sierraromeodelta
Approved
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
wildmanmarty wrote:
Let's see the suit first, sierra.
|
I hope it is BF don't get me wrong. I am just pessimistic when it comes to human nature. Sorry if I seem negative. Just my gut tells me the simplest answer is the right one, and it being BF or Lochness or Elvis (I am not even going to suggest Bear) doesn't seem to be the simplest answer.
I am however scientific and I will keep all options open as I am not closed-minded. lex parsimoniae
-SRD
SierraRomeoDelta
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wildmanmarty
Unregistered
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 531
|
| Posted: October 24th, 2007 02:50 PM |
|
|
I agree, Sierra. I have studied Anthropology and try to be objective by leaving my emotions at the door on matters like this. Whatever this thing is, it just doesn't look or feel like a human to me. If it is, it is a damn good hoax and the actor should get an award. I just don't know what it is and hope the folks that proclaim it a BF are correct. As you mentioned earlier, it probably would not change too many skeptical minds if it indeed is a squatch.
How old would you be, if you didn't know how old you are? |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined:
Posts:
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
