well i guess we can all go home they have there proof.......

hey sassfoot im sure we will see & hear more about this photo in weeks to come indeedy... ty bill g

For the love of god!!!!
Its a bird Bill!!!!!!

hey pdxbigfoot then thats very first photo of a gorilla like bird i ever seen i still say some sort primate maybe not a sasquatch but for agruement sake hehe anything possible. ty bill g updates as this continues...

Bird in flight makes the most sense to me.

Escaped gorilla is possible but not probable.

It makes no sense that it would be a sasquatch (assuming for the moment that they do in fact exist) because from what we know about them (again if they exist - what we think we know), no sasquatch would sit nice and pretty for a camera at a feeder like that.

As it has been pointed out before, where are the rest of the photos? I would bet that this guy has tons of photos of birds at the feeder but this one caught his eye. If its any other animal including BF there would be a few pics of this thing moving in and out of the scene, but birds in flight probably account for most of the trail cam pics with nothing obvious where people start putting red circles on forest shadows. I know there is an explanation for everything and it's easy to explain it into a BF but really just take a step back and look at it.

hey mystical yes a escaped gorilla is very possible indeedy... but we shall see ok ty bill g

(My bolding.) Nail, meet hammer. As you've deftly explained FanofSquatch, it's actually more difficult to "explain it into a bigfoot." It is completely incongruous to envision a bigfoot in broad daylight, plopped down on the edge of some guy's garden, in plain view of a wildlife feeder, a game camera, and, presumably, the guy's house! When I press bigfooters as to why we don't have any good game cam photos of such creatures, I receive all manner of assurances that bigfoots are incredibly wary, spot the cameras and avoid them, smell humans around the camera, hear the shutter, etc. For this image to represent a bigfoot, the subject would have to have not studied the bigfoot survival guide very well.

What's more, said bigfoot would have be something like 11' tall (if it's seated as proponents claim), although its lower extremities would be invisible. It's arms would also have to end in long, dense hairs that hang over the hands and wrists creating an illusion that looks just like the primary feathers on a bird's wing. Finally, this bigfoot would have to have materialized in this seated position - and left from it - so quickly as to not have tripped the camera more than once, sort of like this:

"blink.

Holy crap, there's a bigfoot sitting down by the garden!

blink.

Never mind. It's gone."

It takes a great deal of special pleading to turn this image into a bigfoot, no matter how much a quick glance might make us think that the image looks superficially like a big gorilla sitting at the edge of a garden.


In contrast, we know that starlings have been photographed at this location, and other blackbirds and crows are common in this area. The wildlife feeder most likely provides corn, which either cracked or whole, is relished by crows, blackbirds, and starlings. The subject photographed appears to have wings and be floating above the ground. There are apparently no images of it on the preceding and subsequent frames, and this makes sense for a bird in flight. Thus, even though the image is not immediately identifiable as a bird, it is much easier to explain as a bird, using the principle of parsimony.

The problem is that people who want to see a bigfoot will ignore that principle, and further erode what logic remains in the field of bigfootery. Folks, if you think that this image depicts a bigfoot after all you've read in this thread, then I'm sorry, but you're not helping matters. This is a case in which I'd love to see the BFRO or Jeff Meldrum or some sane mouthpiece for bigfooters go on record publicly by contacting the CNN folks and affirming that this image does NOT depict a sasquatch.

Saskeptic,

Well said for the most part. I'd have to lean to it bein' a bird as well. On first glance though, it's not hard to think primate, so I reckon I can see where folks are comin' from. However, lackin' any mention of an actual sightin', nor tracks in the area, the single image as you mention, the birds, to me...it's most likely a bird. Even if it wasn't, it doesn't offer much.

Pat...

hey saskeptic wow awesome above reply regarding this photo situation indeedy LOL... ty bill g

Can I at least have some humble pie to wash it down?

Click to view attachment

....Bill, care to join me for lunch?

LMAO! Great pic Crimson!

thats funny new photo crimson ty bill g updates as this continues on the ky photo situation. not your photo.

Yes you can. I have seen it on many occasions.



My thoughts (as if anybody cares... ):

It's a bird

If was a BF, I think there would be other pics of it.

If is not a bird, then probably a ghillie suit explaination. Not from Ft. Knox, but maybe someone who knew the camera was set up and just wanted to play a joke. They didn't realize the fuss that it would cause and now are too embarrassed to admit it.

7 pages of discussion about a photograph that - to a normal mind - is obviously a bloody bird.

hey everyone 1 more time i hope the man who took that interesting conterversal photo of a primate, bird or other animal gets realy interviewed by researchers here in this wonderful forum. if people can email or contact the man indeed. good evening bill g

Hi

Why stop at being just normal when there is so much out there to reach for ~ ?


Peace
Tim

hey tim your right what you said in your above reply there is some more opinions to talk about this photo again try contacting the man who has the photo. yeah i know thatll be realy hard looking for a needle in a haystack phone book lol but it worth a try. updates as this continues...

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/...ut-bigfoot.html hey everyone injoy this new article about the ky photo. bill g here another new article about the ky photo yes its very interesting http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/...s-Kentucky.html

http://blog.brickhousesecurity.com/2009/09...quatch-bigfoot/ here another new article today about the ky photo injoy reading it. ty bill g

Was there video captured? Tha article said there was. If so, where can one view it?

There never was any video... this is just American journalism at it's typical best. Several other stories are out today on the net talking about the 'video' captured ... yada yada yada... one poorly informed writer puts it out there, another picks it up, it gets repeated, and then again, and again, and before you know it, it somehow becomes 'fact'.

Pretty much like everything else in bigfooting.

Thanks Guy, I kinda figured that there wasn't. I guess American journalists can be alittle lazy eh?

journalism has spunn way outta control along time ago even before sasquatches were known. ty bill g

Its still a bird.

My thinking is that if it were a bird in flight, it would be fuzzier still, much more so than the background. Depends on the speed of the iso, but I still think the wings would be more fuzzy than the rest of the body at most speeds, unless it is gliding with wings outstretched, but I don't see that in this photo.

What if "it" is crouched on a little hill with enough vegetation to make his legs disappear and to make him not "levitate" as one person suggested that he would have to be doing.

Heck, maybe they can levitate after all and now we know that they are indeed supernatural beings. So, he's just doing his meditation for the day, whilst levitating. (ok, had to fit some humor in there).

maybe its elvis on a hike in the woods jajajjaa na its a bird when th epicture was taken its wings where at the bottom stroke and it yust looks like a humonoid in the bushes

What if the world was flat? What if you could fly? What if.......

How do flying birds leave large HUMANlike footprints?

I give up. How does a BIRD leave large human like footprints?

Your ghillie suit example is ridiculous-looking. It doesn't look very tactical at all. Is it from a movie, or what? Your mention of the hands and a dark horizontal stripe isn't applicable, as all the suits look different. Especially when you consider the environments that they're used in, and the fact that they're customized by the wearer.
The training areas on military installations are large enough that soldiers in ghillie suits don't need to go wandering around on private property.
And the thing in the picture is BLACK.

Here are some realistic ghillie suit pics for you.

Where are the rest of the pics? A trail cam isn't going to miss detecting something that size, unless it slithered on it's belly in to camera range and then suddenly stood up. As someone else has said, there should be more pictures of it. I have a couple of trail cameras and I know how they work.
Also, the lighting is all wrong. Here we have a scene that is photographed either near dawn or dusk, or on an overcast day. All of the flora is nicely lit, in an even light, with few shadows. Yet in this same light, what too many of you perceive as a the face of an ape has no detail to be seen? How can that be possible? As a very serious photographer myself, I can say this is all wrong. That is not a picture of a bigfoot.
It looks like a black bear's butt to me. I think we are looking right up the backside of a nice black bear and nothing more than that. If the man showed us all any more of the photos his camera must have taken, we would all clearly see a bear walking in to view.

I won't try to match wits with William or Bitter on this one. . .Whatever it is, it ain't a Bigfoot.






PS: Bitter Monk & Gucci Mane for Pres/Vice Pres in 2012

i hope we get to see more pics of this animal or more testimony from the man who took the photo. i like the above replys. keep them comeing. ty bill g

I digress.

whats new with this ky photo situation lately has the person been interviewed lately by bigfoot groups. keep me posted ok

It was a bird Bill.

LOL!!!

hey teresa LMAO we will have to see indeedy updates as this continues