BFRO / What's New - America and Canada / Archives / 04-14-2008 / I\'ll share one - Page * 3

Topie: I'll share one - Page * 3 Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
December 31st, 2007 12:31 PM
jude @dksac: Here is a video of a dog climbing a tree:

December 31st, 2007 12:33 PM
DoryR it still looks like a dog to me. Maybe not one of Ammi's but maybe a stray or wild dog. But that isn't any BF. Maybe it is a bear. I just don't see a BF there. Sorry
December 31st, 2007 12:35 PM
dtallman Thanks for the offer DoryR, I may need it or some prozac if I am the only one who sees this. dksac, I am glad you can see something!
December 31st, 2007 12:36 PM
jude wrote:
@dksac: Here is a video of a dog climbing a tree:


the video didn't work for me but I believe you.
Also, how can we tell on that photo how high up the dog is when it is just a small part of the whole scene anyway. It could be on an embankment looking through the branches and twigs.
December 31st, 2007 12:37 PM
dtallman wrote:
Thanks for the offer DoryR, I may need it or some prozac if I am the only one who sees this. dksac, I am glad you can see something!

I am not saying I don't see something... I am saying I do not see a BF. I see what looks like a dog face. But I am sure I could find a dog face and many other faces in the knots in my wood furniture too. Know what I mean?
December 31st, 2007 12:39 PM
dtallman DoryR, I know what you mean. I posted my reply before reading your other post. It does look canine to me also, but I am making myself believe it is something else!!
December 31st, 2007 12:48 PM
ddandrie To me, in the last photo, it appears to have the head turned to the left with the nose and mouth visable along with the higher shape of the head. Also, appears that the hair around the edges of the head appear to be lighter in color. But, it appears quite odd that the branch going accross in front of the face does not show as it crosses the lighter color. It does appear that the branch is covering where the eyes would be. Might be so close to the branch that the lighter hair is covering it. Also, appears to be really heavy and muscular. Actually he or she appears to be standing in a position where we are observing the left side from somewhat of a angle. I do get new Bi-Focols every two years. LOL Just my opinion of what I think I see.
December 31st, 2007 12:48 PM
DoryR Believe me... I am a believer in BF. I just don't see it where it isn't and I do not see any in any of these photos yet. Sorry.
December 31st, 2007 12:59 PM
FBF For those of you who can't see what's in the pics...

Copy the pics to your computer. Burn them on a cd and play them in a dvd player so you can view them on your much better if you have a flat screen tv! If not, take a plate of cookies to your neighbor!;)

(Your computer's monitor and age may have something to do with it. I have a fairly new Dell laptop with a large screen running Windows Media Edition...I have had several people who can't make out anything on their systems that can see much better on mine. Play with the contrast and brightness. The creatures remain darker than the rest of the foliage in most of what I have seen. I AM NOT AN EXPERT AND DO NOT CLAIM TO BE. I AM JUST OFFERING WHAT WORKS FOR ME. Once you get used to it, you can pick the creatures out much faster.)


FBF :)
(Edited by FBF)
December 31st, 2007 01:02 PM
DoryR I have a brand new computer, just got it. It isn't my monitor. And it isn't my eyes. I have glasses on. Sorry, but it is the photographs. Just my opinion. I can't help the way I feel.
December 31st, 2007 01:17 PM
jude @FBF: Fascinating post, thank you for sharing the link.
December 31st, 2007 01:31 PM
LouBob Mudzilla - If you look back through the posts, you'll find a post from me where I say that I don't see anything in most of the shots, and I list the few that I do think are compelling. And there ARE some.

Remember that Ammi sees this as a journey she is sharing with everyone - whatever she gets. She's not posting these shots as proof - she knows they aren't great, but they contain things that she saw that were interesting to her. Maybe something moved. Maybe something's color doesn't look right.

Believe me, when she has a GREAT shot, you'll know it. But she gets a lot of positive feedback from folks on this board who enjoy seeing the photos, even if they can't tell what's in them. So, as long as folks are enjoying her journey, she's going to continue sharing it.
December 31st, 2007 01:32 PM
ddandrie FBF, It would be really great if there were more folks like you.
December 31st, 2007 01:33 PM
dksac Nice dog. He probably won't be walking out on limbs though. Cute. My previous post is in regard to the brown thing on a limb. for some reason I didn't see the dog cat rabbit thing before now. It didn't show up for me.

December 31st, 2007 01:43 PM
jude @dksac: Yeah, I was just being funny. :) Grey foxes though routinely climb trees and go out on thin branches.
December 31st, 2007 01:52 PM
Bossburg FBF - thank you for your link and sharing with us on this forum.

December 31st, 2007 02:09 PM
LouBob FBF - I echo others' sentiments. And I know that Ammi appreciates the support of the Shadowfolk people like you. Your experiences are very much like hers and provide a lot of validation. Habituators are in a unique situation and I believe that what they can learn will be helpful to all BF researchers.

I've checked out the projects on that Web site and it's amazing how similar everyone's photos really are - with the exception of regional differences in foliage. Frankly, I'm amazed that Ammi has had the luck she has with some shots (like the babies in the tree) in such a short time.

(Edited by LouBob)
December 31st, 2007 02:32 PM
Eric Squatcher Hi- This is a reposting of a picture from Dec 13th
and another one from 2 pages prior that Ammi posted of a larger cutout. Check out the additional features. ;)

See the guy peeping out on the left? :)
December 31st, 2007 02:36 PM
DoryR yep, I see him. He's probably have the head the size of a golf ball, right? LOL
ok, maybe a baseball. Maybe I better hit the egg nog early for tonight... it seems like a lot of others are. LOL
December 31st, 2007 03:02 PM
Eric Squatcher
DoryR wrote:
I have a brand new computer, just got it. It isn't my monitor. And it isn't my eyes. I have glasses on. Sorry, but it is the photographs. Just my opinion. I can't help the way I feel.

yep, I see him. He's probably have the head the size of a golf ball, right? LOL
ok, maybe a baseball. Maybe I better hit the egg nog early for tonight... it seems like a lot of others are. LOL

I am seeing a pattern with your posts. It's pretty obvious your not seeing it, and I'm only trying to help by doing these enhancements.
I can see it quite clearly, and my PC and monitor are six years old. The head appears larger than a baseball to me.

December 31st, 2007 03:04 PM
The_Dude I agree with dory. If that were a head it would have to be really small compared to the size of the body.
December 31st, 2007 03:16 PM
padams that is a very large tree, so the head would have to large....they are quite the curious creatures, aren't they? thanks for blowing it up, Eric.
December 31st, 2007 03:20 PM
Eric Squatcher You're welcome padams. Check your email. ;)

The Dude- I'm not arguing the fact that they are small.
Just pointing out what I see. Not every squatch is 8 feet tall.
December 31st, 2007 03:26 PM
The_Dude I never said they were all 8 feet tall. I just think if thats the head it is disproportionately small
December 31st, 2007 03:28 PM
Southman The "guy peeping out" is in the background. There is no way to tell how far, though. He has definite facial features, too. That's the main thing I look for.
Show me an eye and a nose! Lend me an ear! LOL!
These enhancements are great, Eric! I see what the others are seeing with no problem. Good job.


December 31st, 2007 03:29 PM
Eric Squatcher Didn't say you did. The head on the left isn't attached to the fur on the right. They are two separate creatures. JMO :)
December 31st, 2007 03:30 PM
Eric Squatcher Thanks SoMan- I'm heading outta here. Gotta go enjoy New Years with the Fam. Take over if you feel like it! ;)

Happy New Year everyone!
December 31st, 2007 05:46 PM
mudzillaefi Eric,
Your enhancements are helpful to those who don't see anything as well as those who do. Your efforts are noticed and noted. I tested last week to have 20/10 vision which for my age of 40 ( in two months) thats pretty darn good if I say so myself. lol. But even with your efforts, I just honestly don't see any squatch or squatch-like objects in any of the posted photos. Honestly, even though this is being billed as Ammi's journey for which she so graciously took some of us along, it is what it is, or isn't to whomever choses to view the pics. Hindsight, being 20/20, I wish I could get out around my area and prove that with a little effort, someone like you or I could produce a like type photo of shadow and light. When you are convinced you are seeing things, it is a proven fact, you will see them. if you compare this situation to the UFO debate, many a satelitte has been mislabled an alien craft. The mind and sometimes the heart sees what it longs to see, in some cases. with the number of hoaxes that have come to light, and proven to be just that, hoaxes, you and some other members can understand my and others constant questioning of what is being viewed in this particular area. IMO, it makes no sense at all to withhold any definitive evidence from the general public as this defy's logical scientific protocal. In Malaysia where the BF species there is just being investigated, the press, goverment, biologists etc are very free with any info they are aware of to try and prove either way that it exists or is a clever hoax!? If there truly are lets say, BFRO people there with thermal imagery equipment, it is purposterous to try and tell anyone that an 800 lb obviously warm blooded animal has not been viewed to date where there are supposedly 30 to 40 of these manimals. I was born at night, but it was not last night. lol I wish I shared some of you guys zeal for this situation. I really do commend you for the loyalty to Ammi and her freedom of information. It is simply not logical however, to withhold any info that is not contrary to what we as a group believe is a real flesh and blood animal. I recenly watched the DSC show on the zarkov mammoth. (sp) even though they have had the mammoth for years now, it is not kept in secret like an Area 51 prototype, it is for science that the info about the critter is made public. I guess I am trying to explain this too hard, "for what does it profit a man to gain gold and riches, but yet loose his soul." Not too put to fine a point on it, one day, the boy will cry wolf, and we will not come anymore. He will be stuck with the wolf. I guess like others, I feel too strongly about this subject and post mainly out of frustration. But unless something big happens soon, the last person out, please turn out the lights. lol
December 31st, 2007 05:58 PM
mudzillaefi But I would also like to add that the BRFO is the most tolerant forum there is, IMO, especially where differences of opinion are voiced. of course as long as it is done in good taste and fosters helathy debate. This we can all count on here, to be the norm. again IMO. A few years ago, I had debated with Matt M over a recording of the whoop from wshington on whether it was a barred owl or an actual BF. of course he thought it was BF and IMO it was then an owl as I had heard some noises simliar to that.. But, after listening over and over I retracted and agreed with him, and he relented as well. My point is this is a true forum where issues are discussed not pressed. I look forward to checking this website every time I get a chance to. Other sites don't even come close. TY BFRO>
December 31st, 2007 06:01 PM
RobHo Just because you have not seen the type of evidence that you describe here doesn't mean that others haven't. Do you believe that it would be posted here on a public forum as soon as it was obtained? I have no problem with your questions, but some of your premises might not be sound. I'm just asking if you've (and not necessarily you specifically) considered that possibility.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17