Here's the discussion revolving around these pictures from before...

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=128

RonnieBass the bottom teeth got to me as well, here's my post in that thread with a number of Orang pics of their bottom teeth I found online, and no they don't match and in my opinion not even close.

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?sho...mp;#entry352427

Sorry moregon, but I guess each new generation must rediscover the myakka ape pictures for themselves, and reinterpret them in a manner appropriate to their day. Oh wait, that post was just six months ago. Never mind...

Anyway, everyone says its a fake, and they talk about the evidence that it is a fake, so if nobody minds I'm still on the lookout for the actual evidence. For example, if that Orangutan costume is popular in China or Japan then someone must have a picture of it, right?

Different angles, leaves stuck on upper jaw, not in mouth, mouth doesn't change.

Click to view animation.

Thanx WT,

That's really interesting. When I watched that over and over it looks even more like someone in a suit to me, and the hand could be fake, attached to an extended arm.

I'm sorry, but I think we might just possibly be beating the proverbial dead horse into sub-atomic particles.

If I'm not mistaken, the senior citizen who took the photos and wrote the letter preferred to remain anonymous. If that is the case, my question is why? Did anyone eventually find out who she was? If not, this is a red flag for me.
The letter showed much concern for the safety of herself and her family from what I gather, so why not trust the police department to follow up on the possible orangutan she thought was on or near her property? If I've got what I think to be a large exotic animal, primate or not, hanging around my back yard I'm not going to withhold my name and address from the police or animal control authorities, I would want them to respond to verify what I am seeing and capture the animal if at all possible.
Whats worse running loose on my property, a possible escaped orangutan or the police and/or animal control people?

I would also like to add that thanks to what wolftrax did with the two photos, I'm also seeing it looking more like a suit than a real animal.

Think I'll leave that as the rhetoric it was intended to be and not answer it.

I think it's a suit. Morgoth's right, it'd be nice to see this Eastern Asian costume that keeps getting brought up to nail this thing shut, but I don't think I need it personally. I think we are reading exactly what we're supposed to read from the hoax; It was feeding on fronds, had two cluimbs in its mits, was surprised mid bite, and retreated in shock.

But that mouth doesn't move at all. It stays stuck open with a frond seemingly "glued" to its lip. I think it would be harder for me to dismiss this image if the frond was IN the mouth rather than riding it.

But the saw palmetto IS edible, and very useful for certain problems with the prostate gland. So now we know the truth: this is a male bigfoot with a urinary tract infection lured out of the swamp to find a palmetto bush in grandma's back yard. I just know you want to read more about this:

http://waynesword.palomar.edu/ecoph10.htm#palmetto

Saw Palmetto (Serenoa repens)
One of the most interesting palms utilized by humans for food and as a valuable herbal remedy is the saw palmetto (Serenoa repens). This palm is native to the southeastern United States, from Florida to North Carolina. Unlike most palms, the stem is typically prostrate with erect palmate leaves. It grows in coastal dune areas and inland pine woodlands, often forming dense, impenetrable thickets in the understory of pines, such as slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and longleaf pine (Pinus palustris). The common name is derived from the leaf stalks (petioles) which are armed with rows of sharp teeth resembling a saw blade.

The juicy black fruits (drupes) were an important food for native Americans of this region, such as the Seminoles. Early settlers also made a soothing tea from the dried fruits. Therapeutic benefits from saw palmetto tea has been known for decades. It was prescribed for frequency of urination and excessive night urination due to inflammation of the bladder and prostate enlargement. Recent studies indicate that the use of saw palmetto may be more than folklore. The fruit mesocarp is rich in steroidal compounds called sitosterols. According to Herbs That Heal by M.A. Weiner and J.A. Weiner (1994), benign prostate enlargement is caused by testosterone accumulation in the prostate. The testosterone is then converted into dihydrotestosterone (DHT), which causes cellular proliferation and enlargement of the prostate. Saw palmetto extract from the dried fruits prevents the conversion of testosterone into DHT because it inhibits the action of the enzyme testosterone-5-alpha-reductase. This is essentially the same action of the prescription drug finasteride (Proscar). Several double blind studies have been conducted that indicate an improvement in men suffering from enlarged prostates; however, there is considerable disagreement among urologists whether this herbal remedy is really an effective cure for this condition. Until more data is available, saw palmetto may be a useful herb to take as a relatively inexpensive preventive therapy.

The ripe fruits (top) and herbal extract capsules (bottom) of saw palmetto (Serenoa repens). At maturity the fruits (drupes) are shiny black. The extract made from dried fruits is taken by men as preventive therapy for prostate enlargement.

Every middle aged man with an enlarged prostate (which is probably most of us on this board) should take saw palmetto extract capsules.

I know I do, and it works.

Nobody's arguing over the edibility of the plant, it is that the subject is not EATING the plant. The plant is just stuck on the top lip, it's not even in the mouth, and the mouth isn't moving to eat it, the mouth is motionless.

Click to view animation that Tirademan did:

I used to think so too. But I'm no longer sure there isn't some motion between these 2 photos. Here's a gif showing a peek-a-boo with the creature's foot. This can't be the result of a change in camera angle/position.



I'm also convinced this is a foot, not a hand. I scaled up David Barkasy to match their eyeshine. He's 6' 2", with a shoulder height of 5' 3"; he weighs 230 pounds. If he was "in the suit" then matching the spacing of their eyes puts them to the same scale. I placed 2 vectors along David's right arm, shoulder to wrist, then placed the same lengthed vectors on the creature. Note how far away this is from the foot. An actual orang would have longer arms than a guy in a suit, but not this long. So if you accept this is a foot we are seeing, then this would be quite a suit. How would you even put on fake feet like these? Does the China suit include "hand-like" feet? If not, then this would be the only aspect that makes me doubt the "man in the suit" theory. Not to say this suggests it's a skunk ape, but don't orang's feet look like hands? IMO, the verdict is still out on this one.

Well, back to the drawing board, as we used to say. It sure as hell does look like an orang foot to me, now that you pointed that out.

OK, so it's an orang in the Florida palmettos. Can I have a cookie now?

No cookies yet, but how about this:

Click to view attachment

Just verified that Dave's self portrait has the exact same aspect ratio as the original scanned Myakka photos. This could be because Dave scanned it... But the exact same pose is pretty suspicious. I'm trying to get a date on the web picture. The one on his site is from May of 2006, Loren Coleman's copy is from 2002, but the Silver City Serpentarium was opened in 1994.

http://www.scserp.com/

http://www.lorencoleman.com/myakkaillos.html

Does someone have additional information about WHEN Loren Coleman journeyed down to Florida, and which book of his was published with the Myakka photos, and when this book was published, and exactly what his relationship might be with Dave?

It's not the foot, it's a hand. As you can see in this animation, as the shoulder raises the hand also raises with it.

Click to view animation

Just to be sure, I scaled the images so the arms are the same lengths, even though the angles are different you can see the hair pattern matches, and you can even see the fingers behind the palmetto leaves in the image where the hand almost disapears.

As these are photos, not a video or film, body proportions are not important. The arm seems to be straight in both images, there is no articulation in the fingers, so the arm of the human inside (if there is one, and it's not some sort of construct) does not need to reach the hand. There is no real need for somebody to see out of the mask, as they could be instructed by the photographer to bend down and straighten up. Size doesn't matter, as they could be on blocks or a step ladder, as the legs are generally hidden.

What is definite is that the palmetto leaf is not in the mouth, it is stuck to the upper lip, and the mouth never moves. If the subject were authentic, it would have moved the mouth and either munched on the leaf or spit it out. Instead, it is a leaf stuck to a mask to try to lend the illusion of authenticity.

Click to view animation:

Great job wolftrax! I already had an opinion on this beforehand, but now I'm even more sure....love that plant stuck to the upper lip (exactly what I would expect from a real animal... :new_tiredsmiley: )

Thanks, guys, and thanks to Tirademan too for his animation.

So, I take it you concede that the MA does actually move over these 2 photos? I agree that this might not be a foot, but as you say, this isn't a video and we only have 2 frames to create blinking gifs with. It's not known how much time elapsed between these shots so we can't associate specific actions as if they were captured on successive frames of film. IMO, a better case for it being a hand is that the digits interact with some fronds that appear to be off the ground. But without knowing where ground zero actually is, appearances can be deceiving. There's no way to know if the features you are matching up are all part of the same body feature. Especially when there are no clearly defined limbs in either photo. Not saying you're wrong, just that your gifs can't prove you're right.

For argument's sake if it's a hand, we should then be able to get a decent estimate of the arm length. If the distance between the eyeshine is conservatively estimated at 3" (human range) then the length of the arm (shoulder to finger tip) comes to approx. 60" for both photos, (depending where you consider the top of the shoulder to be). This would put the arm span at around 12' and its standing height over 9'. This would have been one big costume. I was reluctant to assume this was a hand for this reason. Measure it yourself and if you dispute this please explain why. The MA's face is square to the camera in each photo so that the eye spacing was consistent and not foreshortened. If the arm is foreshortened, then its length will be underestimated. If the eyes were wider apart than 3" then the arm length will exceed 60". A big costume is possible of course, but I'm not confident you can look at these flashing photos and conclude this. IMO, only some (matching) photos of the alleged suit could settle this.

Nothing to concede, it bends forward and straightens up. A simple lever mechanism (like a teeter-totter)could do the same thing. Also, the image is large enough you can see the hair patterns are the same on the arms in both images. Measuring that itty bitty little space between the eyes in the image where the face is farther back from the camera and then multiplying it so many times to fit the arm length is potentially wrought with errors and unnecessary, the person doesn't need to see out of the mask. How about studying palmettos, assessing the age of the leaves, and then matching them up?

When you or anybody eats, the food usually goes into your mouth, it's not stuck on your face for effect. Very simple attribute here. Your mouth usually moves. Mask mouths do not move, unless they build an underskull in them.

Since this feature matches a known item, masks, then no, we don't need to find the suit this matches.

Ok ... anyone care to hypothesize the rest of this hoax?

Somebodies grandma (and grandpa is implicated as well) was a willing participant or an unwitting victim?

There is no grandma?

You have fixated on the photographs. They are only part of the scheme. The photographs along with a letter were delivered to the authorities.

I'm just interested in playing this out. I find it equally interesting, if this is a commercial suit ... why some chump in Florida can get it, but we can't find it ... anywhere.

I did study the palmetto size, and came up with an arm length of almost four feet. (An adult palmetto fan is about two feet by two feet.) An adult Orangutan can have an arm span of seven feet, but one way or another, this is a very big figure.

There is no known mask for this costume! Absolutely none! Please find one if I am wrong, but go type "orangutan mask" in google, you will be very disapointed. I am going to try using various Internet archives to see if there WAS an orangutan mask from 2001 available from somewhere. I am not having luck contacting the Japanese lady who made this claim. She may be an expert on apes, but not an expert on costuming.

And as someone who does have some experience in costuming and fursuiting, I can tell you this was not a trivial costume to build, check the fur definition on the right arm. I am going to do an experiment to try and duplicate the eye shine. Arm extensions are another possibility.

Also, this was definitely NOT a model, for a few reasons. One, a hoaxer would never take two pictures of a model. Two, that figure is perfectly integrated into those sharp palmettos, remember that the left hand is holding a branch, you can see the fingers and the branch move relative to the other branches and the body.

All that being said, this is likely a hoax. One key point is that the pictures seem carefully orchestrated to NOT provide any clues as to where they were taken, in a very generic palmetto bank. And so does the ransome note from the "old lady." I actually think we can solve this case, with a little luck.

An arm length of 4 feet? Wow, that's quite a bit of difference compared to Gigantofooticus' arm length of 12 feet.



Look at any of the various Star Wars fan sites to see there are a lot of people who make Chewbacca costumes that would require the same method as would be used to make this suit.



No, not a model, but somebody could have easily constructed a frame to use inside the suit. Remember the old Iron Maiden concerts with the giant Eddie robots, but this wouldn't require any special movement, just bending forward. The hand doesn't actually hold the branch, the fingers are extended and if anything they rest on the branch.
Click to review animation:

I think these threads should end up kinda like a casebook with useful evidence about the topic. So since you bring it up, here is the most complete reference on building Chewie costumes. It should give you a sense of just how hard it is:

http://www.rebellegion.com/chewie/index.htm

Now why would someone build a giant orangutan costume? What the heck were they trying to prove? They could have done bigfoot, the skunk ape, or whatever if they were a hoaxer. No, the most likely explanation is that they HAD a giant Orangutan costume and did this on a lark, without many months of investment in building it. In other words, the Orangutan costume hoax thing only makes much sense if there IS a costume or at least a mask out there somewhere. And a good one. That is what we need.

It will be interesting to see how the eye shine experiment comes out. I do disagree with Giganto on the exact size, but check for yourself, if the palmetto fan is two feet then...

Making suits for hoaxes doesn't make sense but it does happen quite a bit. And yeah, I've been a part of chewie making Yahoo groups for awhile. People can make these suits for a variety reasons, even for fun. So no, we don't need to find THE SUIT, the mouth and palmetto stuck to the upper lip is all the reason we need to conclude it is a hoax and some sort of suit.

As far as the arm size, I'm not contradicting you, it just shows this subject isn't of the gigantic proportions that Giganto believes it is.

Are we at least finally beyond the notion that the subject of these photos is a real, live orang-utan? The subject is a hoax or some unknown creature, but it is not[b] an orang nor any other creature currently described by modern science.

The "old lady", anonymous letter, palm frond mustache, and rubber-looking hand/foot all indicate a hoax to me, but I would still love to see some corroborating evidence of this "Japanese" suit thingy. Didn't someone post a photo of something that looked just like the Myakka Ape from some wax museum a while back? Did I just dream that part?

There was the Ripley's Bigfoot exhibit, but I didn't think that was a match, just a coincidental position.

This is not the picture of a real Orangutan that escaped from a private collection or a zoo, etc.

I have searched in both Chinese and Japanese for every Orangutan costume and mask available on the web. Here are some of the results...

Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment

Nope Saskeptic, you didn't dream it. I believe it is in the other thread. It was a shot from the Ripleys museum of a Bigfoot display - and it's every bit as bad as you might imagine. I don't think the Ripley's BF and the Myakka subject have anything in common, other than being generally shapeless and hairy - just my opinion.

And yes, I do believe this is a hoax, I would just love to know how it came together. I'm curious to know if the letter is part of the hoax - or was written by the victim of the hoax.

I'm wondering if these photos in fact pre-date the event and someone constructed the hoax around them. To my mind the letter seems more credible than the photos - and in the scheme of things, I think the photos are pretty good.






Yikes.
Nothing terribly close there, eh?

I believe this issue was originally started by the letter from Mitsuko Choden quoted from Bobbie Short's web site:

"In addition, a May 2006 letter from Mitsuko Choden in Japan revealed the Myakka ape is a costume familiar to them in assorted colors, with plastic teeth molded in the fashion of the great apes. She went on to say the subject in the Myakka photograph expressed no body, arm or leg definition that would lend itself to the great apes."

Here are additional details from Sierra4:

"According to a Primatologist in Japan, currently working in Bhutan, the Myakka photograph is a costumed individual. She identified the draped haired costume as an older model Taiwanese-made suit made of imported yak hair and the white hair or collar in this model was made up of illegally obtained African colobus hair; they said the costume has been revamped to move away from the use of real hair years ago and is now made of faux hair in China. The teeth were classic resin mold found in many other ape and monkey costumes; the reflective eyes, probably something similar to reflective 3M tape easily ordered on the Internet and else where."

At this point I do not believe there is a realistic orangutan suit commonly available from China or Japan. If there was, it could have been from prior to 1995 when the Internet really gained traction. But I still can't find a picture even remotely like this.

Funny, these costumes actually look a lot better, and closer to the subject ...

Whether the Myakka photos are of a real anuimal or a fake is one thing... but to me if its a real animal it just doesnt look like an Orangutan.

Big male orangutans dont seem to be 6 or 7 feet tall, have somewhat different color and density of fur (are bald some places) and have big cheeks and brows.

Please note the enlarged skin "flaps"(for lack of a better term) on the sides of these orang's faces. I don't really see this pronounced skin area on the provided costumes or the MA photos.

I think it might be safe to assume the MA subject is male as orang males are larger than the females (IIRC) and the MA photo subject definately qualifies as "large". I'm estimating it's over six feet tall judging by it's relative position to the mature Saw Palmetto stand it's crouched/standing by. Mature Saw Palmetto stands average six feet to the uppermost tips of the fronds and I've seen stands go over seven feet tall easily.

If it is a hoax, it's a fairly decent attempt. :new_grrr:


If real, then we have a Goliath size Orangutan type ape running around in the South Florida pine forest.

Or else, we have an Orag-looking BF out there. :ohmy:


As a side note: I would likely shoot something that looks like that if it popped up in front of me out in the brush. Not that I'm in the habit of shooting that which startles me, of course, it's just fangs on that size beast looks distinctly unfriendly and I daresay appears very dangerous to life and limb. :new_weirdsmiley:

This may be the picture you are referring to.

Click to view attachment

It seems the eye flash and hair length look suspiciously like that Yowie footage that was shot by the Aussie. He was a movie FX guy I think, I wonder if he had worked on any movies down in florida that year, and decided to play another game.

Thanks!





Indeed. There are multiple characters represented by the subject of these photos that are inconsistent with either species/subspecies of orang-utan. It's closer to an orang than it is to a human, gorilla, or chimp, but it's clearly not an orang.

What it there were two of those Ripley models, and the person in Fla has the other one? It looks suspiciously like the Dells model.

We have a LOT of transplanted midwesterners down here, especially from Wisconsin.

Maybe you should reread my post before quoting me. I said an arm length of 5 feet which would give it an armspan (finger tip to finger tip with arms outstretched) of 12 feet. Because the distance between the eyes is relatively small, I was conservative with an estimate of 3 inches.

In which case, Morgoth's and my estimate doesn't differ by that much. IMO, his est is a bit low. But even a 4 foot long arm would give it a 10 foot arm span.

Funny how David Barkasy's itty bitty eye spacing extrapolated his arm length perfectly. The actual distance from the camera is an unknown factor, however, just because you assume that measurements must be fraught with error doesn't mean they are. Show me, don't tell me, and please don't misquote me.

There's nothing to show. Measurements have no bearing on the subject, it's not walking, it's just standing there with two images showing it bending forward and straightened. Functionally that could be accomplished in many ways.

But yeah, since there is a 2 foot difference between your overall arm span measurements and Morgoth's, and more specifically you do not have definite measurements of ANYTHING from the site, than there is potential for error in your measurements.

Besides, it doesn't matter if it's a 5 inch mouth or a 2 foot mouth, it's not doing anything with that leaf but being stuck to it.

The proportions are way out of the human range, one way or another.

The figure appears to be startled while shredding palmetto leaves. The mouth doesn't bother me, you can see an upper fang through the leaves. This is like the eye shine: a potentially troublesome detail I would not choose to include in hoaxed photos.



I have given up looking for verification of this statement. I have searched the Internet in Japanese, Chinese, and English for Gorilla, Monkey, Yak, and Colobus. This is no suit or costume that matches the figure. It would be a stretch to build something like that out of yak hair, and the "illegally obtained African colobus hair" for the beard makes even less sense in any kind of costume.

One thing does come up again and again in my searches for the word combinations above: the ORIGINAL TEXT STRING from this very forum a few pages back. In other words, the thing above is not "out there."

So, here's what I'm thinking: there are four Ripley's museums in Florida alone, Panama City Beach, St. Augustine, Orlando, and Key West. I don't know if they all, or if any have a "bigfoot" display like the one in the Dells, but I will go to the one in Orlando and find out.

http://www.ripleys.com/locations.php

It's not a very difficult stretch to imagine one of these models in someone's garage or rumpus room in Sarasota. Cart it out to the backyard near the Myakka woods, set it up behind some palmettos, have someone take a picture, then lift/tilt it up somehow and take another picture.

Take multiple high resolution digital flash pictures, please! Ask around, was it ever there?

Will do.

Which doesn't make a difference one way or another.



The leafs are outside the mouth, the mouth doesn't move. If there is a fang holding the leaf, can you show it? Does anybody eat with their food outside of their mouths? This was added to enhance the illusion of a real creature, instead it gave it away as a hoax.



Many people build their Chewy suits out of fake hair used for wigs these days.

Well, sure it does. It means that it's not just a guy in a simple suit, there would need to be arm extensions, at least, or a fairly sophisticated armature for a moving model.



Grandma says it pretty clearly: "It is in a crouching position in the middle of standing up from where it was sitting. It froze as soon as the flash went off. I didn't even see it as I took the first picture because it was so dark. As soon as the flash went off for the second time it stood up and started to move." In other words, these are two pictures taken pretty close together and the animal was somewhat frozen by the flash.

We've also identified saw palmetto as a food source. There are berries that would need to be stripped from the branch. An animal might very well use their teeth for that. I see the upper right fang coming through the leaf.

Click to view attachment



My point about the hair was just that we should probably discard the letter from Mitsuko Choden at this point. The way it was written you would think that it was a slam dunk and totally blew this thing out of the water, but I can't find any support for it at all after a pretty thorough search.

I know somebody could build a suit to look like a giant Orangutan. They could use expensive hard to obtain Yak hair. They could add arm extensions. But why? There just seems to be weak follow up on these photos. We've already discovered (or rediscovered) a few things, so I am amusing myself by poking around a bit.

I'm quoting myself from the other Myakka thread. We're starting to hit a lot of overlap.



If I may go on defense for a moment, I do think that the preliminary facial closeup does indicate the right (creature's right) upper canine skewering the palmetto. If a suit, the head gear is pretty impressive. The head and shoulder is positioned a whole lot like many of the orang pics that we've seen here. The eye shine immediately makes you focus on the face. The facial structure is remarkably like that of an orang (large facial disks are lacking however, and there are questions about the teeth). It's a hell of an impressive mask, so why give it the frond moustache? I know that wolftrax indicates to lend realism, and by virtue of its inclusion in the two photos, gives it away as a hoax. This assumes that the mouth position is static. Which takes me to ... why include two photos? If this was a singular photo with canines bared and no shrubbery on the chompers it raises fewer questions instead of more. I also find the lack of reference to to the photos within the context of the letter interesting. Including the details of size, smell, and sound certainly resonate with the skunk ape crowd, but the author believes it is an orang. She elaborates about the critter taking apples, but instead of reconciling that statement as part of the hoax by sticking an apple in it's mouth, it's got palmetto stuck there. I would generally expect the hoax to attempt to validate itself. This also makes me wonder why this 'suit' didn't make a few more appearances before going to ground for the last six years.

This one is like a puzzle to me. It's got some neat pieces, but they don't make a clear picture.

I guess in my down 2 earth way of thinking, I wouldnt expect a hoaxer to get this obscure Chinese costume, doctor it up with rare African monkey fur, stuff some pa;metto strips on its snout only to take these two cheesy but interesting photos. I can see a cheap suit in a blurry photo... or a good suit in a clear photo, but these are somewhere in the middle.

I can't say whether its fake or not, but I have these impressions:

It's big so whatever it is is a large animal or large costume/model

It does show more detail that the usual fake photo blobsquatch

It doesn't look obviously fake like the miniature model of bigfoot looking up from a pond

Things like eye shine, open mouth aren't usually fake details

I wouldnt think people faking a pic would use such a good costume for such a cheesy photo

Wouldnt a faker make it look like it was eating the palmetto better? (when my cats eat they get food all over their faces). And make it eat something more interesting than leaves.

If its a real animal, its not an Orangutan. I never saw a 6 foot tall grey and white orangutan anywhere around here in Florida.

An Orangutan tame enough to come get food left out for it wouldnt be eating grass and hiding.. he would approach the person feeding it.

Do Orangutans (an Asian tree dweller) even know how to walk around on their back legs eating Saw Palmetto???

:new_weirdsmiley: its an interesting set of pictures for sure. if they are fake they are better than usual and at least thought provoking. if they are real...

Car

Why would it need arm extensions or a sophisticated armature for an arm that just hangs there?



Yes, the witness who despite being worried about the safety of her children and pets did not call the police or animal control, would not give her name or address, and waited 2 months to report it. Naw, that doesn't yell "Hoax!"!

But then let's give this scenario a shot, and the pics were close together, yet the photographer moved to 2 different posittions and angles.


There seems to be reflected light on the palmetto leaf there, but if that is a fang then a person trying to get the leaf to stay on the mouth would try to get the leaf stuck on that fang.

But let's say this was a real animal, and consider what it would take for it to grab that leaf with it's mouth. First it would grab the leaf, as apes use their hands to feed themselves, but it's hand just hangs down to the ground. Then it would bring the edge of the leaf into it's mouth, and bite. The fang (if that is the fang) is in the middle of the leaf, an the rest of the leaf is outside of the mouth. Do we see any bite marks or crumpling on the leaf, indicating the mouth put pressure necessary for the fang to pierce the leaf? No, we don't.

And just for kicks, I scaled the palmettos in both photos, and then did some measuring using the palmetto as scale. If, indeed, the palmetto leaves average is 2', and we can't see the figures feet to know it's height, then the best height we can get of the subject is just over 4 feet.

Click to view animation:

Very good info on the measurement of the palmetto Wolftrax. We have saw palmetto here and I was thinking that palmetto in FL must be a heck of a lot larger than what we have here. Now I see it's just about the same. :wink:



Does anyone remember if Grandma ever said why she was taking pics of saw palmetto in the dark? I can't remember and am too tired to search it out. :laugh:

Well, JJ, I'm just going by what Morgoth said on the average saw palmetto size, but thanks.

As far as what the anonymous witness said about why she was out taking pics of palmettos, she said apples had been taken for two nights previous, and the subject had been making low woomp noises that made it sound like it was farther back than she thought. Attached is the letter, I don't think there was any other explanation besides that.

Concerning the eye shine, this is another reason to conclude this is a hoax. Eye shine in animals is caused by light reflecting off of the Tapetum Lucidum, a reflective layer behind the retina that reflects light back at the retina, aiding the animal to see well in low light. Apes do not have a Tapetum Lucium.

In photos of people we sometimes see red-eye, which is caused by the light of the flash reflecting off of the retina, whch is rich in blood and nerves.

What we are seeing in the Myakka photos is definitely not red-eye, but eye shine. Biologically, it doesn't make sense.

Jayd

From the very first post on this thread:

"One night she heard 'whoomp' sounds coming from outside and she stepped out and snapped a picture of the yard."

I think that suggests the first photo was merely pointed and shot without regard to the subject matter.

Dan