This photo was taken near silver star mt awhile ago, it IS NOT a BF. Just a cool looking profile of one. Thought you might enjoy it.

Took me a while to find where the "stump" was...still not sure if I found it.

Looks like the photographer went forward in time to take the pic.....or, had the wrong date on the camera.

I have a better one of that stump, but I haven't downloaded it from my binoculars yet. I'll also see if I can get another picture on a sunny day. Guys and Gals, it really does look like a squatch when looked at up close. I even has a profile that includes a head and legs. We thought it was real at first and even thought that after looking at it in a zoom. We decided to come back 3 hours later and it was still standing there. Only then did we believe it was natural. I'll get another picture soon and post it.
klp ;-)

I have that one beat... let me find it and will post it.
I did post it on another thread, it was from a California outing in the redwoods.

Enlarged and cropped with contrast added:



Click to view attachment

Thats a pretty good pic and it would definately fool people.

No, no, no. You have to draw a red circle around it!!!

:rolling:

And why aren't any blobsquatches allowed? Because pretty soon, that pic of a stump will probably end up on some other site where they claim it to be a photo of a real sasquatch.

....

That is not a Blob Squach, it is a tree stump and nothing else, I just thought people might enjoy seeing it, see the wonder in nature and how weird it really can be. Hopefully kelly will get his better pic of it up soon.

What were you doing for three hours, after you thought you had sighted a Sasquatch?
Just curious..

Hi Skeptical Greg,
Good question...We were very reasonably sure it was just a stump as we used an air horn to try to get a reaction from it to no avail. We were actively researching an area of about a five mile radius and moved on to another couple of our sites. We returned three hours later and it was still there. Albeit, it was the only black stump on the whole hillside, it was definitely curious looking. We did find a group of seven twisted and broken off trees that took up quite a bit of time. It was a fun and productive trip.
thanks for asking,
Kelly

(My bold highlight)

Big contradiction compared to your posted answer to Skeptical Greg's very logical question.
Which version is the "true" version?

That there picture sure had me fooled

rockinkt- U sure like to knit-pick at ACTIVE RESEARCHERS threads, I know from my threads. U must be an arm-chair researcher. Not saying there is anything wrong with that, arm-chair researchers are needed. In my opinion u should at one time be an active in the woods searcher before u move on to arm-chair status. But what do I know????? Of course I have had an experince on a forest service road at night, and have found evedince of something large and bi-pedal on several occassions in the woods of Washington state. By the way, wish us luck on our next trip.. :laugh:

Yep. You sure got me there. You certainly know me well. I've been no-where and done nothing.
Good luck on your next trip.

Sarcasm,,it isn't just for breakfast anymore. :wink:

lol

Personally, I've always preferred it with dinner and a nice merlot.

Boy that picture would have "stumped" alot of people.

Volsquatch is right though...TB or WB or DG would have snagged it, and claimed, they found it at one of the "hot spots", fed it, and left.

Steve

Give me a break. You are welcome to come out with us, just keep your insinuations at home.
klp ;-)

What insinuation? That you can't even respond the same in one thread? Later :

How "up close" were you if you had to use a zoom? Even in the above you state at first that "We thought it was real at first and even thought that after looking at it in a zoom. " Followed by We were very reasonably sure it was just a stump as we used an air horn to try to get a reaction from it to no avail." So which is it?

You then left for three hours ? Without even verifying or moving in for a closer look of what you believed to be a sasquatch as the time?

As Rockinkt posted already if you guys want people to take you seriously then stop contradicting yourself. And as said in Nighthunters post Gimme a break. Why is it that whenj anyone questions the methods or research abilities of some of you people on this board that this is always the first argument thats fallen back on? Its was past ludicrous long ago . I'd be willing to bet that over half the people who question some of the crappy reseacrh methods that you employ have put more time and effort into active field research than the three of you combined.

There's no insinuation involved whatsoever, just the facts of what you yourself posted in regards to this and other alleged "proof " or "evidence " of sasquatch activity that you've found. There is no one to blame but yourself in regards to documentation and clarity contained within those posts and by what you say and how you chose to present it here for others to read.

IMO , its crap like this thats just as bad for research into sasquatch as anything that Biscardi or others are doing, because it almost invariably starts this way and then moves on apace.

Keep up the good work!! ( Sarcasm btw just so there's no confusion)

I suspect the date is correct, just that it is most likely in this format:

dd/mm/yyyy

I've seen this often in the engineering field; also in written material from Europe.

It does make more chronological sense; moving left to right from a 'finer' time measurement to a progressively 'coarser' one.

Sam

:yeahthat:

As much as it may be fun to post blobsquatch pictures, it doesn't do anyone any good. Entertaiment value, minimal IMO. Could actually work against someone. News travels fast and furious in this field. I would rather be known for careful scrutiny of possible evidence found in the field than in shooting pictures of shadows and odd shaped things of nature. JMO. To each his(her) own.

Wow, look we were out driving, thought we saw something in a clear cut, looked at it for a it, it was rainy across a valley, kinda hard to be sure, i used my air horn, nothing happened, went about our stuff, came back three hours later and it was still there and did not move any, hypothesis confrimed, it was a tree stump. like i said i just thought it was a cool looking tree stump. my bad

cool tree stump,

Tree stumps will do that to you.
My wife and I were out for a walk and she pointed to what she thought was a bear about 300 metres away in a clearing on a hillside. After looking at it for awhile - I explained to her that it was just a stump. I went into how the fact that the weather was warm - it can create heatwaves that distort and cause what appears to be movement. She was really sceptical at first - but after a while - she decided to accept my explanation.
At that point the #@#*damn "stump" walked off. :doh: :laugh:



edited for double post

No need to justify my research or posts. The replies are moronic. My email is: klparnell@yahoo.com you guys can email me in private. This has gone beyond worthiness of public reply and I prefer to dress down someone in private.
klp ;-)

If you want a anyone to believe you or your research "worthy" of any form of consideration other than that it's already been compared to , then I the honus is indeed upon you. The only mornic posts may be the ones given by you and your comrades as it were when being defensive in regards to what you , yourselves have presented.

Or was using the date format dd/mm/yyyy that everyone in the rest of the world uses.

The simplest explaination is usually the right one.

"...prefer to dress down someone in private"


It is obvious that you are trying to save face by desperately yelling "Advance to the rear!" as you run from the battlefield.
It would be far better if you just take your lumps like many of us had to do in the past and learn from it.
Respect is earned - not something that you can order or demand. You should know that.

By the way - I'm not going to take you up on your offer to "dress me down" in private. That sounds like it falls under the old "don't ask - don't tell" rule and I'm not into that kind of "brotherhood". :wink:

Oh...my favorite is the dreaded cowsquatch. Those t-bones are all over the forest, and they like to hide behind trees with just their brown hides showing, making just enough sound to draw your attention...and then move just enough to show they are a live creature, but not enough to expose their face.

spellcheck



:new_whistle:

IMO, we should let this thread die, and learn from it. It's just not a good idea to be posting a blobsquatch picture on this forum in hopes of any serious discussion stemming from it. And yes, a tree stump can in fact be a blobsquatch, along with odd shapes and shadows in foliage, branches, rock piles, cliffs, etc..

The staunch defending of a decision to post a blobsquatch picture is not worth ruining any chance for a potential future collaboration or valuable contact in this field. There are a few here that should really give that some thought. JMHO.

Vol, you stole my thoughts on this thread.

Unfortunatly Burning Bridges happens too often here. Healthy discussion is a big help. Standing 20 feet apart and throwing buckets of burning gasoline at each other does not. Maybe we need a 5 minute lock from the time we pull up the reply screen and the time we can start typing on it. Give people a chance to really think out what they are going to say. And maybe take the edge off of the post.

I just liked the photo, used it on my wife to prove that i was not crazy and that there were bigfoots, anyway like it was said before this horse has been beaten enough, just let the poor thing die

BUT... one thing i want to bring up it what was said about protection in the forest, now i dont know about you all but i am sick of the STD rate in young male BF. I think it is very imporant that we all do what we can to try and stop this epidemice of STD's, now i am asking all of you when you go out to the forests, stop at a gas station and buy a pack of condoms ( i am guessing it would be the magum sized ones) and leave them out there on a tree stump, only by providing the means to stop these STD's can we ever hope to help the BF's. thank you

I think my blobsquatch is much cooler looking seeing as how it comes complete with a red circle and everything!

Edited to add smiley face!

:laugh:

Gee, what a HUGE suprise. :icon_rolleyes:

I know, isn't it?

"Big contradiction compared to your posted answer to Skeptical Greg's very logical question.
Which version is the "true" version?"

Yeah, now we know this pic of the tree stump is a hoax, that is no tree stump. His story is just not adding up.

WOW, I am the one that spotted the tree stump. we stopped the vehicle, got out, looked through binos, blew the air-horn and nothing happened. we determined it was a stump and left. if there was doubt on what it was then it wasnt from everyone in the group. we went some where else and since we had to drive by the stump to get out of there we stopped and looked at it again. it was always called a tree stump, damn. when some of u people start reading a post u are looking to criticize everything posted, and try and make people feel stupid. that is why some of us act so defensive about some of the comments made. have a good weekend...jacob

amen brother! :doh:



Ready for the trip next week? The reason that we don't have so many posts or enough time to criticize everyone here is because we are doing research instead of building up numbers. The camper-van is ready I'm getting my supplies together. For all of you arm-chair researchers: your research is valuable, but for the others your insinuations are not helpful at all. Just problematic. Like I said, you are welcome to come along just keep the BS at home.
klp ;-)

I know that I said we should let this thread die, but I just can't pass this up. Those comments before about jeopardizing future contacts or collaborations, well, this is a prime example of why some wouldn't even be considered worthy.



Oh really now? Always called a tree stump? That's not what KLP stated. In fact, here is his exactly what he said to that effect:





You people should really get your facts straight before you start posting on something. If you're feeling stupid because of this thread, it's your own fault, not the ones who are pointing it out.



You're doing research? From this thread, it appears that you're going on pleasure trips into the woods, goofballing it up over tree stumps. If you thought that was a squatch when you first saw it, then you should have IMMEDIATELY had your ass down there to check it out up close and personal, not three hours later. Sloppy is as sloppy does. You're posting this information on a forum that is made up of many research-minded individuals who are ready and willing to point out bullshit when it starts stinking. You should really take that into consideration before you start posting anymore of your "research" for everyones consideration, and then whining when some sharp-eyed individuals start pointing out the inconsistencies and screw-ups. Here I went to bat for you to try and get you to realize that defending a blobsquatch wasn't worth screwing up any future collaborations or contacts over, and you just jump right back in with a bunch of cocky BS. Well, so be it. Good luck in your future endeavors, you're gonna need it.

Klparnell and Callidus, I don't know why you're being "jumped on" like this, and I just want to thank you for your picture of a stump that looks like a BF. I know that you just posted it because it looks amazingly like a BF and you just wanted to share. I agree, it is a pretty cool looking stump.




I don't think this photo was research. What tipped me off was the title of the thread
"Hoax Photo-Coolest stump ever"

BTW, when I see a stump that I think is "something", I don't leave the area untill I'm sure it is not "something", other than a stump, of course. I'm sure that's what these people did, and then they just mentioned that it was still there upon their return. No bid deal. Cool pic of a stump.

For a Stumpsquatch, that picture was quite a let down. I was expecting a sasquatch shaped stump, not a stump shaped stump. To me, there was nothing in that picture that, even, remotely looked like a Sasquatch. However, I do realize that a picture can sometimes be misleading to a person that was not a witness at the scene.

....somebody else sulking away...toasted by the Jiminator.

This dude needs to hang out with Dallas Gilbert.

That is a great lookin stump that looks like a bigfoot!!!

I wish I was on the ball enough to be able to take a pickure of such a great looking stump that looked like a bigfoot. This helps me alot to no what to knot to look 4 when I look for a bigfoot and to not look 4 stumps.

Good thing u didn't go look closer at the stump....what if had actualy ben a bigfoot? U might have got hurt, or dead...or worse!!!!

Thank u for posting ur hoax picture, I suppose that's better than a misidentification, someone might of gotten hurt real bad.