I have been reading many comments that have been posted about the video before the CA release of it and no where from what I have seen are there any definitve points of clear footage as noted by folks who saw the viewing in Manitoba. Also they mentioned it looked to be 8-10 feet tall how the hell can you tell that? anyway I wonder if CA is protecting their investment right now.

L

That is what I'm saying Somewhere there has been a loss of the video. CA only shows a small portion of what was filmed I think CA is to blame

Now Sage, if we're going to hold off judgement, that should include CA. We don't know all the facts yet about any of it, really.

It may also be because the clip may not have been captured/encoded at high enough quality. But yeah I think you're right. Somewhere along the line the footage quality has been degraded. I wonder if they used the original or a copy?

That is true I'm just pissed off I guess I want someone to blame sorry

My brother has seen this video and the A.C.A. segment. I watched the ACA clip with him, he says the video is much shorter, not that much clearer than what y'all seen. I live 2 hours away from Norway House, the reserve is so small, we can find Bobby Clarke in a matter of a half an hour and force an interview on him....

Dude you from Cross Lake?

Actually, I'm set up in camp. Work fatigues, always moving here, there...I have my house in Thompson, but work construction so much, I never get to see the damn thing.

Ah ok. I used to live in Norway House, that's why I'm asking.

CA certainly has motive to restrict what the public gets to see. What luck to have scooped up the only footage, with at most a couple hundred locals viewing the only copy of the tape. Now CA can milk this thing to the max. Their "expedition" will provide us with several updates and reports with possible video "enhancements" coming. Let's face it, they're not in this for any scientific endeavors. Do you believe the network producers believe in any of this bigfoot stuff, especially after seeing this video? I'll bet the decision to buy this video was made sight unseen. This is a marketing opportunity that could turn into a cottage industry. Regardless of how poor the quality of the footage, with the right marketing this will be the smartest investment they ever made. It's just a shame that CA is the sole caretaker of this video. But who knows, maybe their little expedition bags that big Manitoba bugger.

Curious how people embellished their interpretations after viewing the original footage. A local named Missy Flett claimed it was 8-10 feet tall, with long arms, and long hair. I assume she saw the tape while predisposed she was looking at BF footage. I'm sure Bobby C. gave everyone a blow by blow description of what you were seeing during each viewing. It's probably a matter of an eye witness narrating in the details that are lacking in the footage.

That said, BFRO Director Matt Moneymaker has seen a digital copy of the master tape and he claims the footage is clearest at the beginning, for a few seconds, before it zooms in. After which, as you well know, blurrrrrry! Today's update on the BFRO mentions that CA used the clearest portions of the tape.

At this point, I'm most interested in seeing enhanced stills from those first few seconds.

I dont mean this to be nasty towards you , or anyone else for that matter , but until Bobby Clarke himself , or his brother , either come here and clear this up or do a phone interview with a member from here , everything else is bullsh** heresay! Too much has changed from April 20th (several news articles and wittness statements) to yesterdays airing of "the footage" on Current Affair.





Welcome to the forum!

Already happened, more than once..read the 85 page thread.

Now why do I get the feeling that 'The Whole Story" wouldn't be good enough... IF you want a never ending bigfoot story, then read the one in Members Lounge.....

Belle

Exactly! What was said by Bobbys brother through a phone conversation with Scotto earlier , is not what was aired on ACA.

edited: forgot this..

Does anyone here, get it? There IS no better, clearer video. WYSIWYG

They aren't holding anything back. The footage IS the footage.

And so what if the worlds "foremost bigfoot researcher" (according to AC) says the video is the clearest at the beginning... beFORE it zooms in? At nearly 1000 freakin' feet, do you REALLY think you're going to se a damn thing?

Come on... coffee's brewing... time to wake up and move on. If you only came to the forum because of the "Manitoba Mess"... :doh:

Have you done any investigation into this matter or are you just laying your willy on the block proclaiming "it all ends here"? Just curious.

Have you spoken with BC or his brother since the "footage" aired on ACA?
Do you know for a fact that ACA showed the entire "footage" to BFRO?
Have you spoken to anyone who wittnessed the original video at BC's house?
Have you actually timed the "footage" shown on ACA? 48 seconds of actual "BF footage" was announced by wittnesses before anyone even contacted BC.

Thanks for proving my point.

LoL Sachmo.....

People come in like Bfooter demanding their expectations be met... on their terms..

jimF said it best about 7 posts up... but he didn't get... so I thought I'd chime in.

guess it was pointless...

Where did I "demand any expectations"? I think Sachmo's confused smiley was intented for your first reply to my question. I think. I could be wrong , but I was just as confused by your reply - "thanks for proving my point".

Back to my questions. I didn't "demand" anything. If you cant honestly answer my questions , then at least try and explain your point of view.

Great big..

Gosh... call me cornfussed... but you seemed to think Bobby had to come here and explain himself?

...(edit additional)... and that was exactly what JimF was saying... "Or do a phone interview with a member from here,..." it's already been done... we've seen the whole video... WYSIWYG.

The story is over. We got the whole story. Let it go... let it go...

Huh? For someone who hasn't seen the entire video (yet claims he has), I'm not sure you're in a position to make any claims. If you're disturbed by our speculation then try another thread, there's plenty of them. I sense your bitter over the outcome of this thing and you want us all to move on and shut the f**k up! Pardon me if I let this thing play out a bit more before jumping to conclusions. WYSIAWYG.

That aside, I'm sooo...movin' on. If anything more comes of the Manitoba footage then it will be a bonus, otherwise, it's value is more a lesson in how NOT to video a BF (only worth a measly 6 figures). You can continue to browbeat those who come here to do what comes natural, which is speculating on topics pertaining to BF. So sue us!

PS. you might consider decaf..

better go back and tell me where I said I had ... troll?

Hmm..I suppose you meant the collective WE.

Yes.... the "collective"... as in the 'Borg.'

Guy

I never called you "cornfussed". I dont even know what it means. Is it farmer slang for something to do with a bad crop?


If you read my reply closely , and go back and read everything in the thread , you'll notice some big differences between what was said back then (by Bobbys brother and first hand viewers of the tape) and what was aired on ACA.
Thus , anything at this point I'd consider Bullsh** unless it came straight from the source. Meaning , if ACA did show the entire footage at it's best , I'd like to hear it straight from the horses mouth , who viewed it before any media got their hands on it. "A friend of my brothers friend etc. just wont cut it for me.
I'm not losing any sleep over any of this crap , why should you lose any sleep over how others are taking the matter.
If you feel "you got the whole story" then by all means , dont let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

You seem pretty quick to call someone "a troll" just because they dont agree with you.

I don't think that Bobby Clark would come on here and try to expain the tape and I really don't blame him. I think he actually took a video of a Bigfoot..it just didn't come out very good. If he read half the stuff on here and other threads about how people feel ripped off and blame him then why should he come on here and try to defend himself? He would just get ripped. And knowing native americans like I do he probably would just say to heck with ya. They don't need us anyways.
I think that people that live in that area know how big an animal would probably look across the river where they are at. By what they can see they probably feel that it really is at least 8 to 10 feet tall. Not sure how Bobbies bro came up with the 6 inches of hair but maybe he just guessed?
Anyways he got the video and it is what it is. He can't change it. Not going to do anyone any good now to put him down. These people have a lot of pride.

i agree

Hey Redog... don't really know.. so I wanna' give you the benefit of the doubt. It may not be intentional, but the idea that someone is predisposed to 'know' some things because they are "people that live in that area know how big an animal would probably look across the river where they are at" is just poor logic and stereo-typing a person's abilities based on "where he lives" and his ethnicity. <?> I'm not a politically correct person, but let's not make the leap that the video really IS a Sasquatch because it was a Native North American person, and his or her judgement would somehow be better or different than anyone else who witnessed such an event because of that ethnicity. In the next statement, you point out how his brother's claims of seeing 6 inch hair must just have been a guess, yet his brother is a Native North American, so certainly his judgement should equally be as accurate... yet, there's no real evidence to support hair length. Facts have to be supported with evidence. Here, we have little evidence, and only a handful of facts, none of which return answers.

I understand why some of the "old-timers" here get frustrated with some of the discussion here, because the end conclusion of some of this would be, "Hey, he's a Native American Indian... he saw something and said it was 'this'.. so he must be right. It HAD to be a Sasquatch." Complete leap of faith... based on assumption.

Then "These people have a lot of pride." Ok... does this validate everything about his ethnicity and therefore his sighting, or just a blanket statement about Native American's in general? Isn't this just stereo-typing again? I have pride. I'm a WASP/male. ... these days, that doesn't even seem to count for anything... then again, that is unless someone is stereo-typing me. :rolleyes:


(p.s. I didn't post this in anger or a rush after reading it {your post} last night. I waited until today to think thru what I wanted to say so you wouldn't feel like I was flaming you. If you felt that way, I'm sorry... it's not intentional or personal. Threads like this one: http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=11034 are what are promting many of us to say, "Let's get the facts... just the facts.")

My two cents on the whole cover up idea.

I believe we have seen the best part of the video which was aired in CA (let me stress the word believe). I don't believe there is a cover up/ conspiracy of any kind. Unfortunately Bobby C. could not capture a good video of what he is saying that was a bigfoot. But he did a very good job in promoting and creating high expectations to the video and getting some cash from it (intentionally or not, I don't know).

I do not know that the video quality could improved from the 29 seconds to the other 2 plus minutes that are supposed to be missing from the TV broadcast unless he shot the other 2 plus minutes with another high end video camera.

Lets see, through out the 2.49 minutes that the film is supposed to last the distance and relative area of where the BF were should be very similar, so Bobby would still be using the digital zoom to get the alleged bigfoot in view. The digital zoom of the camera he used was the main problem for all the distortion in the footage (unless he shot the first 29 seconds with one cheap video camera and the other 2 plus minutes with a high quality professional video camera with optical zoom). Since he only used one camera and looking at the quality of this footage (the 29 seconds from CA), I am very confident that the whole video was a terrible blobsquatch (maybe unintentional but still a blobsquatch)!!

I guess many of us got our expectations very high and we are still trying to look for ways to justify our exagerated expectations from this story once we saw the terrible quality of the video, I for one think that this was settle in the moment they air the video.....

Again just my two cents.

Edited to add: Bobbly C. did not had the best equipment (video camera) for the job, clear and simple.