thing from the new Star trek flick. lol
Full Version: Sean Hannity show Friday night
Cant tell what the heck that thing is...I can say the movement looks very much natural to me and the proportions are very odd. It reminds me of this
thing from the new Star trek flick. lol
thing from the new Star trek flick. lol
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...opprr/7081a.jpg
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...98016_thumb.jpg
This is the camera that took the movie. I read someplace, on Crypto I think, that someone confessed that it was a Blair Witch type thing made for fun. That planning for it, with a 60's ford pickup, and 2 60's vintage snow mobiles, hm. The thing that bothers me, is the natural way that thing takes off, bouncing around obstacles, and jumping with all 4 legs in the air, running at a gallop. I have never seen a human do that. Previous to that segment, the film shows 60's vintage snow mobiles, driving the ford pickup down snowy roads, the camera pans left and catches that thing running at a full gallop on all 4's, parallel to the truck on the left side, at a good distance from the road. The kid filming, gets out and goes back with the camera trying to find it in the brush. So on etc etc. The quality of the film, that washed out color, that camera used, all fits. If someone had an old film camera, buying film today, the quality of the film bought for it today, would surpase what that film shows, I think. Maybe a film person in here can post something about buying new film today, for an older camera, and what it would take to wash out the color to match film of that time. Can someone identify exactly, what models of snowmobiles those are?
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...98016_thumb.jpg
This is the camera that took the movie. I read someplace, on Crypto I think, that someone confessed that it was a Blair Witch type thing made for fun. That planning for it, with a 60's ford pickup, and 2 60's vintage snow mobiles, hm. The thing that bothers me, is the natural way that thing takes off, bouncing around obstacles, and jumping with all 4 legs in the air, running at a gallop. I have never seen a human do that. Previous to that segment, the film shows 60's vintage snow mobiles, driving the ford pickup down snowy roads, the camera pans left and catches that thing running at a full gallop on all 4's, parallel to the truck on the left side, at a good distance from the road. The kid filming, gets out and goes back with the camera trying to find it in the brush. So on etc etc. The quality of the film, that washed out color, that camera used, all fits. If someone had an old film camera, buying film today, the quality of the film bought for it today, would surpase what that film shows, I think. Maybe a film person in here can post something about buying new film today, for an older camera, and what it would take to wash out the color to match film of that time. Can someone identify exactly, what models of snowmobiles those are?
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...prr/Dogman4.jpg
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...prr/Dogman3.jpg
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...prr/Dogman5.jpg
These are 3 profile shots lifted from the film, as the thing is caught running parallel to the truck. The 3rd one shows that the head is down, and the huge shoulders higher than the head, and arms. I'm not concluding this. Just an observation.
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...prr/Dogman3.jpg
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...prr/Dogman5.jpg
These are 3 profile shots lifted from the film, as the thing is caught running parallel to the truck. The 3rd one shows that the head is down, and the huge shoulders higher than the head, and arms. I'm not concluding this. Just an observation.
When this thread was moved, it lost the last post by lookinginmichigan. Can a mod change the name to " Gable Film--Dogman? " or something appropriate to the topic? 
QUOTE(Hogsback @ Jul 19 2009, 04:38 PM) 
WOW!!!!!!!!!
Warning: Graphic images!
I am highly suspicious of this because of the timing. Seems a little too coincidental with all of the recent publicity. However, it "looks" right and if it is real, the imagery is very disturbing. What is the story on this one? The "victim" does not look (at least to me) like the quick shot of the boy in the mirror. Of course if this has already been proven a hoax, then big deal. I give credit to the producers, they seem to be pretty good.
Check out Cryptomundo for new info on the Gable film!
Cryptomundo doesn't have any "new" info on the film. Steve Cook, a dj, found the film in a trunk he bought at an estate sale. Steve Cook didn't make the film. It's a real film using an 8 mm camera, as I stated in a previous posting. The "hoax" isn't about Steve Cook. The "new film found" has a totally different history behind it, with new and unrelated players. I'm not saying that all of this is real. Just keep it in perspective with the facts as presented. 2 totally unconnected situations, with the same people in the both films, but with the new players of the 2nd film being from the police file report side, the first film being from the original Bell and Howell camera, which actually shows in the second film, laying on the ground. The second film, shows 2 police men, and a police car, and a case number. Someone will follow that line up. Don't judge it either way. Just see what happens, objectively. I'm not saying any of this is real. Just see what happens as time goes.
hey everyone this film it realy amazes me constantly i like the opinions so far indeed is this going turn saga ill get the popcorn & soda 
ty bill g
ty bill g
QUOTE(lookinginmichigan @ Jul 13 2009, 11:00 AM)
Do bears move "sideways"?
No, but gorillas do.
The police car in the "new" film, is a 1971 Olds 88 Avenger. That cuts to a year of the film.
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...prr/Dogman6.jpg
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...prr/Dogman6.jpg
QUOTE(Grazhopprr @ Jul 20 2009, 06:06 AM)
The police car in the "new" film, is a 1971 Olds 88 Avenger. That cuts to a year of the film.
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...prr/Dogman6.jpg
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww339/G...prr/Dogman6.jpg
??? olds never made anything called an 'avenger,' and you're off by a couple of years. look at the front bumper and the signal lights. much different in the two pictures you have. the car in the film is a 73 or 74 olds 88. it's in the colors of a mi state police cruiser, but since most patrol cars of the day were fords or chevys, this was most likely a captains or detectives car.
Found this over at Grendelfilms.
In 2007 a film surfaced on the internet known as the Gable Film. It showed an unidentified creature seeming stalking and then attacking a camera operator. Initially I was caught up in the excitement of the footage and thought that, perhaps, it represented the only viable evidence for the existence of the creature of legend known as the "Dogman". My original analysis also turned up some very strange things on the film such as additional animals disappearing and reappearing somewhere else in the frame. However, further frame by frame analysis of the original raw capture supplied by Steve Cook, the Minnesota DJ that owned the film stock, revealed that these anomalies were just artifacts from the combined frame rate of the film, the frame rate of the video camera used to capture it, and AVI (audio video interlacing) artifacts typically found in video footage.
The footage was featured in my release "Hunt the Dogman" from October of 2007. In that film I promised my viewers an update if anything more was learned from the film. Well, here it is:
The original film carton had the words "Gable Case" written on it. It showed some sort of animal attacking the camera operator. Then, as I was part of an internet radio broadcast, someone in the chat area was alleging that the Gable film creature was, in fact, a Chow Dog, or Chow Chow. Although I disputed that fact with the person, I could not get that out of my mind. So, once again, I went over the footage and came to the following conclusion: The Gable Film, AKA Gable Case or Gable Incident, was nothing more than evidence being used in a dog bite / dog attack lawsuit. I am thoroughly convinced of that. As great as it might have been to have had a legendary beast captured on film, the simplest and most sensible conclusions are usually right. The conclusion I reached is very simple and it certainly makes sense. So, there you have it. If there is a Dogman creature, it did not make its cinema debut on the Gable Film.
Dogs can and do move and run sideways, typically when they are excited, felines do the same thing when threatened along with puffing up their tales. Moving toward you at an angle makes them appear larger and more threatening. Although I believe the animal in the Gable film is a Chow Chow I admit that there are instances were there is something very feline about the way it moves. Someone over at Cyrpto coined this the "Blair Dog Project" and I tend to agree.
In 2007 a film surfaced on the internet known as the Gable Film. It showed an unidentified creature seeming stalking and then attacking a camera operator. Initially I was caught up in the excitement of the footage and thought that, perhaps, it represented the only viable evidence for the existence of the creature of legend known as the "Dogman". My original analysis also turned up some very strange things on the film such as additional animals disappearing and reappearing somewhere else in the frame. However, further frame by frame analysis of the original raw capture supplied by Steve Cook, the Minnesota DJ that owned the film stock, revealed that these anomalies were just artifacts from the combined frame rate of the film, the frame rate of the video camera used to capture it, and AVI (audio video interlacing) artifacts typically found in video footage.
The footage was featured in my release "Hunt the Dogman" from October of 2007. In that film I promised my viewers an update if anything more was learned from the film. Well, here it is:
The original film carton had the words "Gable Case" written on it. It showed some sort of animal attacking the camera operator. Then, as I was part of an internet radio broadcast, someone in the chat area was alleging that the Gable film creature was, in fact, a Chow Dog, or Chow Chow. Although I disputed that fact with the person, I could not get that out of my mind. So, once again, I went over the footage and came to the following conclusion: The Gable Film, AKA Gable Case or Gable Incident, was nothing more than evidence being used in a dog bite / dog attack lawsuit. I am thoroughly convinced of that. As great as it might have been to have had a legendary beast captured on film, the simplest and most sensible conclusions are usually right. The conclusion I reached is very simple and it certainly makes sense. So, there you have it. If there is a Dogman creature, it did not make its cinema debut on the Gable Film.
Dogs can and do move and run sideways, typically when they are excited, felines do the same thing when threatened along with puffing up their tales. Moving toward you at an angle makes them appear larger and more threatening. Although I believe the animal in the Gable film is a Chow Chow I admit that there are instances were there is something very feline about the way it moves. Someone over at Cyrpto coined this the "Blair Dog Project" and I tend to agree.
It's probably a chow, just like in the Prince Edward Island video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_emnqc_YVLY
QUOTE(Dantallus @ Jul 20 2009, 08:43 AM)
Found this over at Grendelfilms.
In 2007 a film surfaced on the internet known as the Gable Film. It showed an unidentified creature seeming stalking and then attacking a camera operator. Initially I was caught up in the excitement of the footage and thought that, perhaps, it represented the only viable evidence for the existence of the creature of legend known as the "Dogman". My original analysis also turned up some very strange things on the film such as additional animals disappearing and reappearing somewhere else in the frame. However, further frame by frame analysis of the original raw capture supplied by Steve Cook, the Minnesota DJ that owned the film stock, revealed that these anomalies were just artifacts from the combined frame rate of the film, the frame rate of the video camera used to capture it, and AVI (audio video interlacing) artifacts typically found in video footage.
The footage was featured in my release "Hunt the Dogman" from October of 2007. In that film I promised my viewers an update if anything more was learned from the film. Well, here it is:
The original film carton had the words "Gable Case" written on it. It showed some sort of animal attacking the camera operator. Then, as I was part of an internet radio broadcast, someone in the chat area was alleging that the Gable film creature was, in fact, a Chow Dog, or Chow Chow. Although I disputed that fact with the person, I could not get that out of my mind. So, once again, I went over the footage and came to the following conclusion: The Gable Film, AKA Gable Case or Gable Incident, was nothing more than evidence being used in a dog bite / dog attack lawsuit. I am thoroughly convinced of that. As great as it might have been to have had a legendary beast captured on film, the simplest and most sensible conclusions are usually right. The conclusion I reached is very simple and it certainly makes sense. So, there you have it. If there is a Dogman creature, it did not make its cinema debut on the Gable Film.
In 2007 a film surfaced on the internet known as the Gable Film. It showed an unidentified creature seeming stalking and then attacking a camera operator. Initially I was caught up in the excitement of the footage and thought that, perhaps, it represented the only viable evidence for the existence of the creature of legend known as the "Dogman". My original analysis also turned up some very strange things on the film such as additional animals disappearing and reappearing somewhere else in the frame. However, further frame by frame analysis of the original raw capture supplied by Steve Cook, the Minnesota DJ that owned the film stock, revealed that these anomalies were just artifacts from the combined frame rate of the film, the frame rate of the video camera used to capture it, and AVI (audio video interlacing) artifacts typically found in video footage.
The footage was featured in my release "Hunt the Dogman" from October of 2007. In that film I promised my viewers an update if anything more was learned from the film. Well, here it is:
The original film carton had the words "Gable Case" written on it. It showed some sort of animal attacking the camera operator. Then, as I was part of an internet radio broadcast, someone in the chat area was alleging that the Gable film creature was, in fact, a Chow Dog, or Chow Chow. Although I disputed that fact with the person, I could not get that out of my mind. So, once again, I went over the footage and came to the following conclusion: The Gable Film, AKA Gable Case or Gable Incident, was nothing more than evidence being used in a dog bite / dog attack lawsuit. I am thoroughly convinced of that. As great as it might have been to have had a legendary beast captured on film, the simplest and most sensible conclusions are usually right. The conclusion I reached is very simple and it certainly makes sense. So, there you have it. If there is a Dogman creature, it did not make its cinema debut on the Gable Film.
i'm pretty dubious about this. in the first place, the dj is from michigan, not minnesota. second, if this new film is real, it pretty much lays to rest the idea that this was a dog bites man story. i e-mailed the guys at michigan-dogman.com and challenged them with the grendel films statement. here's what they wrote back.
"Mr. Johnson was provided an early digital copy of the film for study and use in his documentary. He has published the opinion that the film shows a common dog bite scenario, but he has no evidence to support that claim other than his feelings. He has a right to his opinion of course, and his idea has as much merit as anyone else's at this point, but we must question how strongly he stands by it. Since he published that opinion, he has asked at least three times if we would send him the original film for further study, the last such request coming just a few months ago. He also told us he had been in consultation with M.K. Davis (the researcher who completed a remarkable study of the Patterson-Gimlin film), and that after viewing the Gable Film, Davis 'could not sleep for several nights.'"
Wow,
Thanks for the follow-up John. I would certainly be interested in hearing what M.K Davis has to say about the footage, especially if it was enough to make Johnson change his mind. To think Davis had sleepless nights over Gable after spending all that time viewing PGF is a little un-settling. As if Bigfoot, Bears, Cougars and wolves lurking in the woods wasnt already enough to think about when you're out there alone.
Thanks for the follow-up John. I would certainly be interested in hearing what M.K Davis has to say about the footage, especially if it was enough to make Johnson change his mind. To think Davis had sleepless nights over Gable after spending all that time viewing PGF is a little un-settling. As if Bigfoot, Bears, Cougars and wolves lurking in the woods wasnt already enough to think about when you're out there alone.
Here's an interesting read on this matter. Be sure to view the enhanced film.
It's the best I seen of the film and really slows it down so one can see more detail.
The similarity between the victim and the guy (Aaron Gable?) chopping wood
and also under the hood of the truck is uncanny. Very disturbing film.
http://www.ghosttheory.com/crypto/gable-fi...r-attack-video/
x
It's the best I seen of the film and really slows it down so one can see more detail.
The similarity between the victim and the guy (Aaron Gable?) chopping wood
and also under the hood of the truck is uncanny. Very disturbing film.
http://www.ghosttheory.com/crypto/gable-fi...r-attack-video/
x
I wrote John Johnsen at Grendelfilms yesterday afternoon.
Hello John,
>
>
> I was wondering what M.K Davis saw in the Gable footage that was unerving to him? I recently read your opinion on the film being a dog bite video on your site. Do you still stand by that opinion? I have always thought the culprit in the footage to be a Chow myself but I'm open to having my mind changed if there's something I'm not seeing in the film.
>
> I enjoy your work very much and wish you the best of luck in your continued endeavors.
>
> Sincerely
>
> James (thats me)
Here's the reply
James,
The Gable Film footage was copied by Steve Cook via the simplest method...that of projection and videotaping the projected imag. Consequently the frame rates were different and the field rate (60 fields per second) in the video also left artifacts. What Davis saw was a frame that seemed to have one animal disappearaing while another appeared in a different location on the same frame. So, in essence he thought we had truly happened upon something supernatural. But upon my video frame per frame examination I was able to tell that it was artifacts he was seeing, not another animal.
John Johnsen
Grendel FIlms
Hello John,
>
>
> I was wondering what M.K Davis saw in the Gable footage that was unerving to him? I recently read your opinion on the film being a dog bite video on your site. Do you still stand by that opinion? I have always thought the culprit in the footage to be a Chow myself but I'm open to having my mind changed if there's something I'm not seeing in the film.
>
> I enjoy your work very much and wish you the best of luck in your continued endeavors.
>
> Sincerely
>
> James (thats me)
Here's the reply
James,
The Gable Film footage was copied by Steve Cook via the simplest method...that of projection and videotaping the projected imag. Consequently the frame rates were different and the field rate (60 fields per second) in the video also left artifacts. What Davis saw was a frame that seemed to have one animal disappearaing while another appeared in a different location on the same frame. So, in essence he thought we had truly happened upon something supernatural. But upon my video frame per frame examination I was able to tell that it was artifacts he was seeing, not another animal.
John Johnsen
Grendel FIlms
posting this on several sites to gather opinions.
cannot get this thing off my mind. considered possibilities all night last night. so, for the sake of debate, let me present a 'what if' scenario...
what if -
) the creature in the first gable film is not a dog, bear, or ape, but is some form of unknown predator?
) these people, let's call them "the gables," had spotted this thing before, and were determined to capture it on film?
) they heard or saw something that caused them to get into the truck with the camera and find the creature?
) they located it, it ran. they left the truck and tracked it into the woods, cornered it, and one or more of them was attacked, leaving their camera as the only witness?
) the police happened along and found the abandoned truck, then found the torso?
) perhaps fearing whatever had done this might come back and cart off the rest of the body, they call in a local civilian with a film camera to document the discovery?
) mr. gable was somewhat of a loner, a drifter, or new to the area, had no next of kin, and no one knows him?
) since dna did not exist then, and unless mr. gable had committed a felony, there would be no record of his fingerprints, and no way to positively identify him?
) being a rural area, with no local newspaper or television station, the story goes unpublished?
) the police run a routine check on missing persons files, with no results. the case goes cold?
) the authorities don't suspect foul play. to protect the local economy, so dependent on hunters and tourism, the thing is written off as an accidental death, natural causes, or suicide. the official position becomes that the body consumption was been done by scavengers?
) because no crime has been committed, the police never contact the civilian who filmed the scene. or if they try, he has already fled to florida. however, they do have the original film, and they send it off to an expert to determine what kind of animal it is?
) the expert's opinion is inconclusive. he never bothers to return the film and no one asks. he tosses it into a closet and forgets it, dies 25 years later, and the film ends up in a box of junk at his estate sale?
remember, this is all very new and dramatic to us. cops have to deal with stuff like this every day as a matter of routine.
okay, start whacking away at my theory!!
cannot get this thing off my mind. considered possibilities all night last night. so, for the sake of debate, let me present a 'what if' scenario...
what if -
) the creature in the first gable film is not a dog, bear, or ape, but is some form of unknown predator?
) these people, let's call them "the gables," had spotted this thing before, and were determined to capture it on film?
) they heard or saw something that caused them to get into the truck with the camera and find the creature?
) they located it, it ran. they left the truck and tracked it into the woods, cornered it, and one or more of them was attacked, leaving their camera as the only witness?
) the police happened along and found the abandoned truck, then found the torso?
) perhaps fearing whatever had done this might come back and cart off the rest of the body, they call in a local civilian with a film camera to document the discovery?
) mr. gable was somewhat of a loner, a drifter, or new to the area, had no next of kin, and no one knows him?
) since dna did not exist then, and unless mr. gable had committed a felony, there would be no record of his fingerprints, and no way to positively identify him?
) being a rural area, with no local newspaper or television station, the story goes unpublished?
) the police run a routine check on missing persons files, with no results. the case goes cold?
) the authorities don't suspect foul play. to protect the local economy, so dependent on hunters and tourism, the thing is written off as an accidental death, natural causes, or suicide. the official position becomes that the body consumption was been done by scavengers?
) because no crime has been committed, the police never contact the civilian who filmed the scene. or if they try, he has already fled to florida. however, they do have the original film, and they send it off to an expert to determine what kind of animal it is?
) the expert's opinion is inconclusive. he never bothers to return the film and no one asks. he tosses it into a closet and forgets it, dies 25 years later, and the film ends up in a box of junk at his estate sale?
remember, this is all very new and dramatic to us. cops have to deal with stuff like this every day as a matter of routine.
okay, start whacking away at my theory!!
Don't like the picture of the corpse.
Blood appears to be bright red.
How much blood should you lose if your chomped in half? No pooling.
Where's the lower torso? If it supposedly chewed it off and drug it, why are the intestines in a mass and
not strung out? No drag marks. Was it supposed to have carried the legs off?
kill is too clean.
other things as well that just don't add up.
Good show, but thats about it.
Just an opinion.
Blood appears to be bright red.
How much blood should you lose if your chomped in half? No pooling.
Where's the lower torso? If it supposedly chewed it off and drug it, why are the intestines in a mass and
not strung out? No drag marks. Was it supposed to have carried the legs off?
kill is too clean.
other things as well that just don't add up.
Good show, but thats about it.
Just an opinion.
Its always interesting that there are no defensive wounds on the arms, no blood, scratches or even dirt.
QUOTE(johnmilner @ Jul 21 2009, 01:29 PM)
) since dna did not exist then, and unless mr. gable had committed a felony, there would be no record of his fingerprints, and no way to positively identify him?
I am pretty sure DNA did exist back then, we just did not have a way to test it...
Seriously, in response to Wheellug, you make some great observations. I think that blood turns brown/rust fairly quickly. Therefore, unless the incident was very recent, then the lower abdomen should have been more discolored and not bright red. The only response about the legs/lower body I can come up with is that it picked up the remains and carried it off. That of course, now leads to the theory that it did so bipedally. Or maybe the creature just ate it all.
Well, so much for the " lets wait and see what happens ' approach, lol. Just can't stop the speculation, on little evidence. Maybe this,,,,,,,maybe that,,,,,,,what if what if. If anyone lives in upper Michigan, then go find out. Otherwise, it's a waiting game.
I dont think the first dogman film was genuine and I dont think the gable film is. The first one was very likly a testshot for an amateur horror movie. Now, whats a better sequel than the gable film?
Good job!
Good job!
I would have to disagree with you grazz, we are talking about the Bigfoot Forums, where some of the greatest investigators this field has ever seen reside. If anyone can crack this, it would be someone here I would bet. Remember the Georgia fiasco, maybe I am not remembering this right but wasn't it proven to be a fake on this site first. I could be wrong. Also the second film that is being showcased right now, although not shot by the supposed Gable, still seems like it is linked to the first film, so when I said cryptomundo had new information about the Gable film, that is what I meant. It was new information to me anyways.
Well, no one here "solved" the Georgia boys fiasco. Everyone just laughed at them from the beginning. As Cryptomundo is concerned, that info was nothing new. For those who've followed it. People who've just bumped into it lately, it would be new I suppose. That's why speculation is just funny to me. No one will know till something new happens about the Gable films. Just sit back and watch, wait. 
Thanks for clearing that up for me Grazz! I thought the info about the new film was...well new. Either way though, you are right, we probably will have to wait for something to happen. I only thought that there might be a chance that someone on here could crack this whole mystery, maybe with something like "Hey wait a minute, that guy is wearing a pair of nikes that you could only buy in 1995, yet this film is supposed to be from the 70's" or something to that effect if you catch my drift. 
One question not asked, what happened to the kid in the passenger seat? You would assume that the driver was the man in the red flannel. Assuming more, he might have grabbed the camera and chased whatever that was, and got his reward. Meanwhile, the kid is still in the truck. Assuming more, the incident happened up near Bellaire, but on a traveled road, so the kid could have flagged down a passing car. Someone mentioned that the "cops " didn't carry weapons, but, in the film at frame by frame, you can see holsters on both of them. The poster of the second film, said that the uncle who filmed it, was doing this for the Department of Natural Resourses, about a bear attack. Then the state police were called, who are in the film. All of the people implicated, are from Bellaire. Quick response time. And the film used in the second filming, was a better quality, and better color, it seems. Not up to our standards today, but better than the Sears family cameras sold retail. Watch any of your home movies from the 60's and 70's previous to video. It's a mish mash of color wash out, and color saturations. The red in the guts and shirt, might be over saturated. Might not. Might all just be a hoax. Like I said before, speculation is a waste of time, and I just wasted 5 minutes typing this. 
On the topic of Dogman. Just found this picture on the dogman site and can't remember it being
kicked around here. Is this pic even real, it looks computer enhanced.
kicked around here. Is this pic even real, it looks computer enhanced.
That's awesome Squatchaholic. It can't be real. The photo would never make it's way out of dogman's belly and onto the web. That photographer would be toast. But that photoshop job came out cool. Except for the lack of streetlight shining on it (considering it's right under the lamp).
This link might prove to be an interesting read ....
http://blogs.myspace.com/lindagodfrey
I posted this in another thread about this topic, hope I'm not breaking protocol. I know I know it is a myspace blog ... but give it a chance. Some interesting things about the original poster of the part two film is backtracking.
This forum is the most interesting place on Earth. God bless us all, everyone.
Sniff.
http://blogs.myspace.com/lindagodfrey
I posted this in another thread about this topic, hope I'm not breaking protocol. I know I know it is a myspace blog ... but give it a chance. Some interesting things about the original poster of the part two film is backtracking.
This forum is the most interesting place on Earth. God bless us all, everyone.
Sniff.
Stunning image Squatch!!!!
I have no idea if it is real or not, but if it is this is incredible. If it is real, it looks to be about what, 9-11 feet tall? Here is another interesting image from the same site:
Click to view attachment
http://www.michigan-dogman.com/01_encounters_index.html
Interesting experience here:
http://www.michigan-dogman.com/01_encHuronCty.html
I have no idea if it is real or not, but if it is this is incredible. If it is real, it looks to be about what, 9-11 feet tall? Here is another interesting image from the same site:
Click to view attachment
http://www.michigan-dogman.com/01_encounters_index.html
Interesting experience here:
http://www.michigan-dogman.com/01_encHuronCty.html
Yeah, I saw that one too, VA. I think I have to agree with Furious George on these 2, If you were close enough to take those pictures you were close enough to get more than one or eaten.
Interesting nonetheless.
Interesting nonetheless.
To me, it looks like he altered this painting I found of a werewolf. It looks like he closed the mouth and blurred it. Maybe, maybe not.
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
I think that second picture may be a photoshopped lion, but I haven't found the right photo yet.
Click to view attachment
Good eye FG
QUOTE(Furious_George @ Jul 28 2009, 04:04 AM)
To me, it looks like he altered this painting I found of a werewolf. It looks like he closed the mouth and blurred it. Maybe, maybe not.
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Good eye FG
QUOTE(Squatchaholic @ Jul 28 2009, 01:25 AM)
Yeah, I saw that one too, VA. I think I have to agree with Furious George on these 2, If you were close enough to take those pictures you were close enough to get more than one or eaten.
Interesting nonetheless.
Interesting nonetheless.
Supposedly the girls who took this picture were inside the house. Great picture nonetheless.
Hi
~ Dantallus ~ I got to give ya a For that awesome Box of Hooked on Phonies.
Peace
Tim
~ Dantallus ~ I got to give ya a
For that awesome Box of Hooked on Phonies.Peace
Tim
QUOTE(RedRatSnake @ Jul 28 2009, 08:55 PM)
Hi
~ Dantallus ~ I got to give ya a For that awesome Box of Hooked on Phonies.
Peace
Tim
~ Dantallus ~ I got to give ya a
For that awesome Box of Hooked on Phonies.Peace
Tim
No doubt. Funny stuff.
Thanks
QUOTE(VAFooter @ Jul 27 2009, 05:45 PM)
Stunning image Squatch!!!!
I have no idea if it is real or not, but if it is this is incredible. If it is real, it looks to be about what, 9-11 feet tall? Here is another interesting image from the same site:
Click to view attachment
http://www.michigan-dogman.com/01_encounters_index.html
Interesting experience here:
http://www.michigan-dogman.com/01_encHuronCty.html
I have no idea if it is real or not, but if it is this is incredible. If it is real, it looks to be about what, 9-11 feet tall? Here is another interesting image from the same site:
Click to view attachment
http://www.michigan-dogman.com/01_encounters_index.html
Interesting experience here:
http://www.michigan-dogman.com/01_encHuronCty.html
Looks to me like some type of taxidermy. The front legs look rigid and posed and the object is just far back enough in the shadows to make it difficult to make out.
Couple "Gable" questions:
1) Has anybody who lives in that area requested a death certificate for "Aaron Gable"?
2) Has anybody confirmed that "Aaron Gable" even existed at all via DMV or other public or court records?
3) Has anybody requested and secured the incident report prepared by the local authprities for this alleged fatality?
4) Can anyone who lives in that area secure some date specific photos of the type of uniform worn by the alleged investigating agency shown in the film in order to compare it to the uniform in the film?
5) Has anybody who lives in that area tried to identify the officer in the film by reviewing the report or showing the film to other retired officers from that agency?
6) If "Aaron Gable" did exist, has anybody interviewed his family, or more importantly, his son (the witness).
7) Has anybody checked with the local newspapers in that area in an attempt to either find a death notification (obituary) or a news story about the death?
8) Has anybody checked with the local Coroner's office to verify the death and cause of death?
1) Has anybody who lives in that area requested a death certificate for "Aaron Gable"?
2) Has anybody confirmed that "Aaron Gable" even existed at all via DMV or other public or court records?
3) Has anybody requested and secured the incident report prepared by the local authprities for this alleged fatality?
4) Can anyone who lives in that area secure some date specific photos of the type of uniform worn by the alleged investigating agency shown in the film in order to compare it to the uniform in the film?
5) Has anybody who lives in that area tried to identify the officer in the film by reviewing the report or showing the film to other retired officers from that agency?
6) If "Aaron Gable" did exist, has anybody interviewed his family, or more importantly, his son (the witness).
7) Has anybody checked with the local newspapers in that area in an attempt to either find a death notification (obituary) or a news story about the death?
8) Has anybody checked with the local Coroner's office to verify the death and cause of death?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.