Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is pretty good, its quick, but you can clearly see an adult and what looks like a smaller one, this was taken by a game warden in WA state, ( mid 90s.)
Lol.
Love when he says "whoa there he goes".
Too funny.
I played it about half a dozen times stopping frame by frame and I never saw a small one. All I did see was what could easily be a man in a costume. The "whoa there he goes" could be because the man was waiting for his friend to finally get into view; he does not sound very scared. We know from our posters that everybody that sees one of these creatures wets themselves in fear.
I played it about half a dozen times stopping frame by frame and I never saw a small one. All I did see was what could easily be a man in a costume. The "whoa there he goes" could be because the man was waiting for his friend to finally get into view; he does not sound very scared. We know from our posters that everybody that sees one of these creatures wets themselves in fear.
Just so you know, this was one from the 'TOP 5' most credible pieces of Bigfoot evidence. It has been thoroughly investigated.
Its like I said in another post, it doesnt matter what kind of picture or video comes out...some will always call them hoaxes, frauds, guy in a suit, etc.
Just so you know, this was one from the 'TOP 5' most credible pieces of Bigfoot evidence. It has been thoroughly investigated.
By who? What were the findings?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62
Its like I said in another post, it doesnt matter what kind of picture or video comes out...some will always call them hoaxes, frauds, guy in a suit, etc.
The video is inconclusive. It's far away, lacks, clarity, and offers no other evidence. Given the huge dearth of evidence for Bigfoot compared against the many proven hoaxes over the years, I would lean toward this being another "man in suit." But no, I can't know for sure. It's inconclusive.
The video is inconclusive. It's far away, lacks, clarity, and offers no other evidence. Given the huge dearth of evidence for Bigfoot compared against the many proven hoaxes over the years, I would lean toward this being another "man in suit." But no, I can't know for sure. It's inconclusive.
Too grainy and low resolution really, this was recorded in 1994 - certainly they had better camera technology. Why is it even worse quality resolution then the now discredited Patterson video hoax of 25 years earlier?
Freeman really had a similar history to Patterson as sort of a bigfoot con man. Spent lots of money and time "searching" for bigfoot and was a publicity seeker, always coming up with casts when no other researched could find them, complaining how much money he spent and lack of payments, until he finally found one to film (which suggests he was ready for a big payday). He also has a history of manufactured evidence.
"A few of Freeman’s “Bigfoot-related” discoveries were found to be faked, including manmade hair samples..."
We also have this: "The late Canadian Sasquatch researcher Rene Dahinden thought Freeman was manufacturing evidence. Freeman’s old Forest Service employers regularly would withhold comment about Freeman’s findings because of a less than clear past involving produced evidence."
He is the only researched I know to cast a "butt print" of bigfoot however:
" Freeman says he finds an imprint of a buttocks from a Bigfoot, he alleges, along Dry Creek, in the Blue Mountain area."
Because of his history and the apparent purposeful lowered resolution of the video - my opinion is that this is faked.
Including the Paterson film that website starts with; the first four look like a man in a two piece suit. Why do you belittle all sightings by throwing hoaxes at us and expect us to see 'evidence'. If the 'creature' is out there surely somebody can do better than this. You talked about how clear the thermal images were of the wild pigs. feral hogs, and then you throw out this poor attempt to prove what; that the only way these creatures exist is if somebody makes them exist?
Dd714 has a great post. Why don't you 'research' his research?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
