104 replies to this topic

[Sakari]

Sakari, on 04 May 2011 - 03:42 AM, said:

You made me go back and look....

1. Correct, not a apple tree at all....

2. Not a deer, a dog or Coyote.

3. A gillie suit, the bright areas are where the suit is opened up and not covering everything, the IR picks it up and brightens it.( light colors )

4. The camera is NOT in the same position it was for the first shots, it is much closer to the road...Unless someone moved the tree it was strapped to, I would say the camera was being held by someone while the other " posed ".

5. Again, the camera took 3 " burst " shots on the first pictures, why only one of the guy in the suit?...Cameras have settings for 3 burst, 6 burst, etc..No need to change from a 3 burst setting to a 1 burst....

6. I can not quite make out the dates on the first set of pics, but the time is later at night, 9 or almost 10 PM....The temperature is 65 degrees....Yet the Gillie suit picture is at 78 degrees, and says 5:55 PM, with a explanation that the time stamp is off...That does not add up at all....Temperatues do not rise during the night, they fall or stay stable...The excuse of the time stamp being wrong was to cover the time of 5:55 PM....Fail.

Not in the mood to look further, if someone get's bored, find the temperature at this location for the date of 09/02/10 at 12:30 A.M.....I would be willing to bet it was not 78 degrees.

The site that did the investigation either did not bother, or did not catch what they have posted.They have the temperatures....78-80 degrees around 6 P.M....Below 70 after 11:00 P.M. ......Good investigators.....LOL

As said, total fake.

I think many know I use trail cams, and have started a thread on it that many are contributing on.

I can safely say I am positive of above...

Realm, on 04 May 2011 - 03:53 AM, said:

I agree with you. A fake.

I noticed camera position too, and story doesn't match pictures. What apple trees?

I edited in more information, good stuff....Proof as some would say.....It is in the quotes above....The temperatures

I wrote the site about this, see what they have to say....

[Realm]

Here's all the temp info etc.. from same web site, plus more pictures (but not of bigfoot) Little thing appears to be a fox. And a Gillie suit challenge for you Sakari

http://www.squatchde.../VtTrailCam.htm

Edited by Realm, 04 May 2011 - 05:08 AM.

[Sakari]

Realm, on 04 May 2011 - 05:05 AM, said:

Here's all the temp info etc.. from same web site, plus more pictures (but not of bigfoot) Little thing appears to be a fox. And a Gillie suit challenge for you Sakari

http://www.squatchde.../VtTrailCam.htm

I wish I had one.....

Will ask around .....

[Sakari]

I recieved word back from the site......I see to many holes in their excuses, and feel they are convinced all ready....

Quote

Appreciate  the effort Robert. But as the investigation has shown, the time on the camera  was off. 5:55 there would have been daylight. No daylight in this picture.  

  

WE  determined the time to be after midnight, after examining the camera which had  remain untouched since the photos.  Yes the timestamp was wrong.  We also did   comparison shots using the cameras  and, the units temperature was off by 7-8  degrees reading ...warmer)

  

Plus  I know the guy personally. Not a BS'er  and remains open to any theory yet.  

  

We  have not ruled out a ghillie suit, however, we estimate the subject to be far  bigger than average. 6'8" - 7'2" weighing close to 400-500 lbs. (Plus no one  knew the camera was there and it was not hunting season, and usually people  running around in ghillie suits have a firearm.)

  

We  have not ruled out a owl yet even though we've had Dr. Macabbe state it was  close to the ground.

  

These  were included in the investigation notes on the page.

  

We  appreciate the input however we'd like to point out your arguments have been  previously reviewed and addressed.

  

Thanks,

  

  

Even with their excuses, the temperature would be wrong either way.If it were off, why is it correct on the canine pictures?...And where are the 2 missing pictures from the 3 burst setting it was obviously on?

The camera was un-touched?...How did the person see the pictures than?

Too many holes......

I asked this, still waiting....

Edited by Sakari, 04 May 2011 - 04:36 PM.

[undertheflow]

One of the more interesting Bigfoot images, however I have my doubts.  

At least they seem open to more plausible theories.

[Sakari]

undertheflow, on 04 May 2011 - 04:47 PM, said:

One of the more interesting Bigfoot images, however I have my doubts.  

At least they seem open to more plausible theories.

Not what I am getting from my communication with them....look back at email.

[~TheBigK~]

Are we still entertaining the possibility that it might be some kind of animal? Cause it really does look to me like the back of an owl that's close to the camera. I know that wouldn't explain the discrepancies in the times and temperatures, but that's just what I'm seeing. I looked to see what kinds they have in Vermont and Barred Owls seemed to come up a lot. Couldn't find a good pic of one flying from behind to compare though.

[Sakari]

~TheBigK~, on 04 May 2011 - 05:40 PM, said:

Are we still entertaining the possibility that it might be some kind of animal? Cause it really does look to me like the back of an owl that's close to the camera. I know that wouldn't explain the discrepancies in the times and temperatures, but that's just what I'm seeing. I looked to see what kinds they have in Vermont and Barred Owls seemed to come up a lot. Couldn't find a good pic of one flying from behind to compare though.

I am still entertaining that idea as well...I am not saying it is a hoax 100%...The temp's are very odd, and the timestamp issue, and also the fact the IR flash has picked up bright spots.( guillie suits have openings all ver )....My biggest sign is there are not other pictures when the camera was on a 3 burst setting 2 nights before....

It could very well be a Owl, kind of like this was a " bigfoot" and said to be a large 400 lb creature....And it is a Crow

Edited by Sakari, 04 May 2011 - 06:16 PM.

[~TheBigK~]

Sakari, on 04 May 2011 - 06:15 PM, said:

It could very well be a Owl, kind of like this was a " bigfoot" and said to be a large 400 lb creature....And it is a Crow

Yep, I remember that. I think some people had mentioned that it could have been a black garbage bag too. I think it was that pic anyway, if not it was a similar one.

[Vance665]

If I had to put money on it I would bet it's an owl.

[Soul Kitchen]

I really think it's a bird in front of the camera. It shouldn't be that blurred, it's not like the Bigfoot was deliberately performing a tease for the camera.
I don't think it's a bear either.

[CAUTION SONIC TOXINZ FLAME]

is it wierd that it looks like a bird to me?? i think soo lol.

[Sakari]

CAUTION SONIC TOXINZ FLAME, on 05 May 2011 - 03:01 AM, said:

is it wierd that it looks like a bird to me?? i think soo lol.

No, a specialist said it is a Owl

[snuffypuffer]

It's an owl swooping down out of the tree after something. Look at the motion blur, plus it's in front of the branch on the bottom, meaning whatever it is is closer to the camera than the guy in the test photo, who's crouched over the ground for some reason. Bad burrito?

[The Russian Hare]

It looks like the back of a large bird to me.