http://home.earthlink.net/~bigfootcountry/id13.html
what do you think?
Full Version: Hazy Bf Video
I remember seeing this earlier this year.
It's far too hazy and unfocussed to tell if it is a Bigfoot or some guy walking to an outdoor Coke machine.
It's far too hazy and unfocussed to tell if it is a Bigfoot or some guy walking to an outdoor Coke machine.
Geesh - I just dont know.. Its very difficult to see what it is.. Obviously its upright -what does get my attention is the left arm swing up right before it dissapears.. I just dont know, cant say one way or the other.
I hope this person keeps that cam corder near by - lmao.
I hope this person keeps that cam corder near by - lmao.
hi everyone good evening its is a very interesting possible sasquatch filmfootage. thanks bill
this is atleast 18 months to 2 years. there are some good threads here that have very good discussion and some photo enhancement etc.
new meaning to the term blobsquatch. All I could see was a dark humanish shape. Even the manitoba footage was a little better.
And turn yer speakers on when you enter the website- sounds a little "X Files" ish to me.
And turn yer speakers on when you enter the website- sounds a little "X Files" ish to me.
Yep, this one was discussed a couple of years ago. DDA created a contrast enhanced clip which gave the few fleeting images some definition. Portage County Bigfoot
I noticed that most comments referred to the head as smallish, yet the arms seem unusually long. Something to remember about backlighting, however, is that objects appear to shrink as overexposure bleeds over the edges of a darker foreground image. This gives that ET appearance of small head and thin limbs. But in spite of this, relative body lengths remain intact. There is only 1 frame that appears to give us a relatively unobscured look at the arm. Even the elbow can be estimated in this shot, which appears in about the right spot (no arm extensions?). Doing a quick arm to head ratio I came up with a 4. My arm to head ratio is 3. This dude has some freakishly long arms. IMO, this is either a hoax or authentic, as opposed to a misidentification of a human who was out on a late night stroll. But a blobsquatch, nonetheless.
I noticed that most comments referred to the head as smallish, yet the arms seem unusually long. Something to remember about backlighting, however, is that objects appear to shrink as overexposure bleeds over the edges of a darker foreground image. This gives that ET appearance of small head and thin limbs. But in spite of this, relative body lengths remain intact. There is only 1 frame that appears to give us a relatively unobscured look at the arm. Even the elbow can be estimated in this shot, which appears in about the right spot (no arm extensions?). Doing a quick arm to head ratio I came up with a 4. My arm to head ratio is 3. This dude has some freakishly long arms. IMO, this is either a hoax or authentic, as opposed to a misidentification of a human who was out on a late night stroll. But a blobsquatch, nonetheless.
Mystery solved..with the help of Photoshop. I was able to clear up the picture nicely...and...it's just Paul McCartney 
.
.
evedince fo exestince??? maybe, kind of fuzzy. but, it is something 
It don't matter if it was crystal clear daylight video,,, it'll never do and you all know it!!!!!!!!! IT's A FAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Crew Chief
Crew Chief
I know it's been discussed for a while now, I went back and read the other post. I don't want to dismiss it as a fake for one simple reason...IF YOU KEEP CALLING EVERY NEW VIDEO OR PHOTO A FAKE WITHOUT ANALYSIS, NO MORE VIDEOS OR PHOTOS WILL SURFACE! No one wants to be called a liar without evidence saying they are. Can't people just say it's inconclusive and be happy with that? Of course it won't prove bigfoot exists, it just adds fuel to the fire. I know that if I weren't sure what I had just filmed or photographed, and I read all of these posts BLASTING people for putting up their inconclusive photos, I wouldn't want to post mine.
QUOTE(photowriter @ Dec 1 2005, 10:28 AM)
I know it's been discussed for a while now, I went back and read the other post. I don't want to dismiss it as a fake for one simple reason...IF YOU KEEP CALLING EVERY NEW VIDEO OR PHOTO A FAKE WITHOUT ANALYSIS, NO MORE VIDEOS OR PHOTOS WILL SURFACE! No one wants to be called a liar without evidence saying they are. Can't people just say it's inconclusive and be happy with that? Of course it won't prove bigfoot exists, it just adds fuel to the fire. I know that if I weren't sure what I had just filmed or photographed, and I read all of these posts BLASTING people for putting up their inconclusive photos, I wouldn't want to post mine.
Fair enough photowriter, I agree to some degree with your argument, but in the same way it is not good to take any fuzzy video and expect that anybody would consider it the real deal an time and resources would be turn into determine the validity of the blobsquatch. In my personal case I am not a researcher neither want to be one, but I have interest in the topic so being just a simple enthusiast and not an expert in any way or form I tend to be highly skeptical of hoaxes and scams. So in my point of view, even if this or any fuzzy videos (a.k.a. blobsquatches) are from real Bigfoots they don't prove much (to me at least) as any reliable evidence that might make a diference in understanding or finding this animal so I don't see what will you really gain in waisting too much time and effort on them. If the video shows some good details and further research on it would yield something significant (like the P/G film) then it makes sense to spend time and resources investigating the footage.
There is nothing wrong to call a blobsquatch a blobsquatch!!! Being from the real deal or not....
Again my own point of view
Very interesting video. Thanks for the link!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.