First the disclaimers:

I did a search for this and found nothing. If this has already been discussed, I apologize for opening a new thread and feel free to merge.

No video can ever be considered 100% valid as proof that BF exists.


The question:

What factors would need to be present in a video of BF that would cause you to say, "As far as I can tell, this shows a real BF."?

For me the factors would have to include the following:

1) It would have to be a clear shot of it.
2) It would have to do something humanly impossible.
3) It would have to be in a setting that would be difficult to hoax in.
4) There would need to be multiple, independent witnesses.


As an example, the President is giving a live, televised environmental speech outside in a national park. As the cameras are showing the speech, a BF walks very quickly across a wide open pasture behind him some 3-400 yards. It covers the 600 yard distance in about 30 seconds and disappears into a dense and deep section of the forest. As he does, all of the network cameras zoom in on it, getting highly detailed views. Secret Service agents are seen flocking to the area, but nothing is found after an intensive and lengthy search...

This would be the kind of scenario that I would say, "Yes, that was probably not a hoax."

Maybe we need some kind of checklist for the factors that would qualify.



Anyway, feel free to add your own criteria.

Great thread
Wrong area
Thanks for getting my hopes up for a second with that title. lol

Oops! Sorry...

Hoped the topic line would prevent that.

For me.

It would obviously have to be clear/focused/unjumpy and all that and close enough for a positive ID as something other than a blobsquatch.

Superhuman actions would be good but not necessary but if such were recorded, each act/event would have to be investigated vigorously because of special effects and other "offcamera" help.

Sound would be a wonderful addition.

The ORIGINAL in an untampered/unedited version, available for independant examination. ( if it didnt have that- you can stop there, nothing else would matter)


Obviously, the more detail the better, the closer the better.

A film that also is long enough to show ancillary evidence in real time such as tracks/path actually attributable to the film subject

A biggie to me would be not so much "superhuman" actions but a series of complex and multiple articulations which would aid in distinguishing it from a suitsquatch.

Another helpful thing would be the filmer not being a person with a vested interest in the subject, questionable character etc. ( leads to probability of authenticity- it would so much "add proof" as that would help to eliminate doubt)

And lastly, a thorough,detailed and PROPER site investigation performed by QUALIFIED people and the fruits of that actually support and could be directly linked to the video.

I believe the above would produce a film that even science would find as adequate proof that such an animal exists.

Should someone be in a position of having shot video or film of such an animal, one thing I would strongly recommend in addition to some of the things already mentioned, is film one's self getting out the GPS, turning it on, acquiring satellites, and determining a location, date and time of the filming without ever having turned off the camera.

While such a readout could be faked, it would be difficult, and such supportive information would go a long way toward establishing when and where the evidence was gathered. Having identifying marks on the GPS unit, and surrendering it for examination would probably also be important.

Being familiar with chain of custody protocols for the resulting document (film/video) would again be important.

FWIW

definitive? to where it's irrefutable?

film of a corpse.....with said corpse in possession also

anything short of that, and somebody somewhere will always be able to be skeptical, and poke at least one, if not several holes into the scenario

to me, a film, with sound, of one making that scream that sounds like a tornado/air raid siren would be proof enough for most
but, nobody can even get a clear shot of one standing still, much less alive moving, making sounds, os as above, dead.

I would think that two simultaneous video shots from different angles from two unrelated individuals of the same event would be helpful. Throw in a high quality still photograph that shows a lot of detail along with some collaborating physical evidence like foot prints and you start to have a pretty good case.



I would think that two simultaneous video shots from different angles from two unrelated individuals of the same event would be helpful. Throw in a high quality still photograph that shows a lot of detail along with some collaborating physical evidence like foot prints and you start to have a pretty good case.

That's a fantastic tip. Thanks Colobus. I carry mine whenever I'm out but never would have thought about it as a validating tool like this. But I also never shoot video so it wouldn't do me much good....

Hi

That would be pretty good

Maybe like a camp ground sighting or a bus load of tourists at a rest stop

Peace
Tim

Clear footage of a mother, and her young. Eating, or down her grooming it (with sound) would convince me 100%.