79 replies to this topic

[Kobolt]

Not even a glimpse of a view ,,, 2 easy to be done even without editing on a pc

[csspwns]

cant see much but a blur

[Ecto76]

It's an Ewok!

[Mr. Smith]

All these comments about high school hoax or publicity hounding don't fit with the photographer. He's shunned the publicity and wouldn't let the interviewer show his face.

If any hoax was played, it was on them too.

[H.H. Holmes]

shaddow134, on 01 June 2012 - 04:12 AM, said:

Not convinced at all,the footprint doesn't look real at all to me.

This looks staged to me..Bring me DNA and i will believe.

Hunters must set up game tracking camera's all over the US and Canada,yet nothing seems to crop up.

It wouldn't matter if a tracking camera did pick up a bigfoot on film travelling through the forests  of the northwest or any other place for that matter.

The footage would be subject to the same criticism that is apparent in this thread towards the "student's" bigfoot footage. There would still be no DNA or any other secondary evidence of the bigfoot's existence, just a picture of an animal that looks like one.

Let's face the facts here, folks. Picture, video, or even audio recordings are no longer sufficient to rid others of their skepticism towards the existence of what you (as in someone who saw the bigfoot with their own eyes) saw.  There needs to be DNA evidence, multiple expert witnesses, and plenty of corroborating physical evidence, such as nests or tools (if bigfoots, if they exist, are that advanced) to even begin to be taken seriously.

Edited by H.H. Holmes, 02 June 2012 - 02:46 AM.

[Englishgent]

vitruvian12, on 01 June 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

I agree, with snow on the ground you would think theyd find more than one perfect print.  Too perfect it looks like.  The figure seems to be a bit blotchy, maybe its just the zooming and video quality.  It just doesnt look proper the way it moves theough the bushes.  Almost like its behind one istant and overtop the next.  Its so slight an image even zoomed I find it surprising it would have even been noticed to zoom in on.  It reminds me of another video on awhile ago that was the PG film creture superimposed on a different setting.  That one was more obvious but this one could be the same idea.
Maybe the high school project was make a hoax bigfoot film

Hi Vitruvian and Shadow134.
You are both correct. The footprint appears to have been imprinted straight down onto the snow. There is no suggestion of a walking movement, ie, there is no impression of where the heel would dig into the snow and no impression of where the toe area would push off for the next step.  You try walking barefoot in snow and leaving an impression like that. Even walking 'flat-footed' where the heel connects to the ground at the same time as the rest of the foot, there is still movement of the toes when pushing off to take the next step!
As has also been said, this is in snow. Where are the other footprints. There should be a whole trail of them, which should have been photographed giving the length of stride.  Even students should know to photograph such evidence.
I have no doubt that this is a hoax purely for the simple reasons outlined above.  Not just because it was a bunch of students.

[Hawkin]

DNA will be the concrete proof that's needed. Even if someone got great footage and stands by his/her story, people will think it's a hoax. The Roger Paterson film at Bluff Creek California back in the late 60's is contreversial and it's the best footage of a Bigfoot. Bob Heironimus claimed he was the one in an ape suit and that Roger Patterson was going to pay him for the stunt where Robert Gimlin (Roger Patterson's partner) to this day claims that it was real.

[27vet]

Overwhelming evidence...

[highdesert50]

There are a large number of park rangers/biologists routinely using very sophisticated remote imaging and audio recording equipment to record deep forest activity. Yet, from these credible sources, I am unaware of any research supportive of bigfoot.

[shaddow134]

highdesert50, on 03 June 2012 - 02:39 AM, said:

There are a large number of park rangers/biologists routinely using very sophisticated remote imaging and audio recording equipment to record deep forest activity. Yet, from these credible sources, I am unaware of any research supportive of bigfoot.

This is my argument as well,to date i have not seen any credible evidence what so ever.

And this latest video just increases my skepticism even more.

[dharma warrior]

Photos of footprints and blurry videos just won't cut it.
We need a body, be it dead or alive.
But fear not! "Finding Bigfoot" and the intrepid BFRO crew are on the job! They'll get to the bottom of this mystery!
LMFAO!

[Shayde]

Wow. Again we get shockingly bad footage of what could be (but won't) of a living mystery. Anyone would think it's going to end up being a fraudulent bit of nonsense.


Come on! This may just be me, but if I saw something like this yomping across a forest glade, I'd be off in pursuit to get as much evidence as was possible! Okay, that might be a bad idea, but still...

[orangepeaceful79]

Ecto76, on 01 June 2012 - 03:12 AM, said:

To strengthen my point of view a bit more...with the technology that hunters use and the average person can get a hold of a lot of advanced hunting technology why can't they capture irrefutable proof of Big Foot? The videos are always shaky, never taped in high def and always seem to be at the right place at the right time??? The next time you go to video a supposed Big Foot in action... USE A DAMN TRI-POD!!!

Technology will never be able to capture evidence of bigfoot that is irrefutable and a body will never be found because of just one simple fact - I just don't think there is any such thing.  Its the only explanation that makes any sense.  I'd love to be wrong of course.  It just doesn't seem likely.  ALL THESE YEARS and no bigfoot body?  Its just so farfetched.

[InfamousI]

African mountain gorilla: scientifically cataloged less than 100 years ago.
Always believed in Bigfoot/Yeti/Snowman.
Despite, there being an undeniable lack in well invested, credible, capable, scientists, zoologists, or just people with a camera out looking for them; I say there's more proof they do exist, than don't.

[CCS]

Why do people even reply to these threads if all they're going to do is scream that the video is fake and criticize everything? You know, it was probably blurry for a reason. I doubt very seriously that they knew they were going to see whatever they saw so it's not like they could set up a Chris Nolan shot of it. People and their cynicism  on this site are extremely annoying. People claim that they want pictures and photos but when they do get it they claim that its fake. Hell, I bet if a body did show up people would find some way to discredit it.