Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
NatureBoff

Photograph Of Male Werewolf On Hindlegs,1997

266 posts in this topic

I'm a believer in the menacing big dog phenomenon, yet the sasquatch research team who took the photo missed this obvious explanation. It's better than a mystery washer-woman which was the official conclusion, right? Attached is a photo I took in rural Clackamas County, Oregon in 1997. It is of something that was walking along the top of the hill

Clackamas County, December, 1997

Attached is a photo I took in rural Clackamas County, Oregon in 1997.

It is of something that was walking along the top of the hill. When it noticed me, it turned and headed in the opposite direction. The ground was very hard and no real footprints were able to be found. I had sent this to a friend of mine Rob Butler, he said he would forward it around for me. I just got hooked up with e mail so I am sending another copy out. On this one, there is a close up superimposed in the bottom corner.

Thank You, Rick Wood

Director, O.S.I.R. (Oregon Sasquatch Investigations & Research)

"In Search of an Answer"

The consensus was, in 1997, there wasn't enough definition in this image to declare it a sasquatch. There was no muscle mass to speak of; no shoulder width or head definition. It appears to be a woman in a knee-length coat out taking a walk. Another blobquatch that we routinely get when people don't think these issues out...not everything in the woods is a bigfoot

(..not everything in the woods is a bigfoot nor a woman in a knee-length coat!

post-94765-039937000 1288087865_thumb.jp

Edited by Humblemun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would anyone come to the conclusion, that that vague slightly blurry picture, is a werewolf?

Ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It actually does look like a woman in a fur coat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears to me that some one is using this gentleman's outline...

nosferatu1922.jpg

Nosferatu.jpg

*real freaking vampire-does not sparkle*

Nibs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Geeze!

Nosferatu! *shakes finger* Tisk Tisk. Silly boy.

Hes always getting himself into trouble. Anyone remember when he was in spongebob, and turning off the lights?

What a guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It actually does look like a woman in a fur coat.

But if the researcher is looking for sasquatch, it implies he was out in the wilderness. Why would there be a lone woman walking by herself? And even if so, why would she then suddenly take off in the other direction? It doesn't fit imo. Fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hes always getting himself into trouble. Anyone remember when he was in spongebob, and turning off the lights?

What a guy.

:lol: That one was awesome. I certainly hope he isn't wandering around woods in the US though...

But for the sake of argument, what in that picture would even make it discernible between a werewolf and bigfoot? The story isn't very detailed either. He had to have gotten a better look at he/she/it in real life and should be able to get a better description then what we're left to see in the picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if the researcher is looking for sasquatch, it implies he was out in the wilderness. Why would there be a lone woman walking by herself? And even if so, why would she then suddenly take off in the other direction? It doesn't fit imo. Fact.

I have no logical answer for that. Maybe she just wanted to get away from it all? Ever had one of those days where you just take a road trip alone? Sail off into the sunset kind of deal? In her case, she walked off into the woods. Not trying to sound like a smart @ss, but really, it wouldn't be unheard of. People do strange things everyday, this is hardly Pleasantville.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But for the sake of argument, what in that picture would even make it discernible between a werewolf and bigfoot? The story isn't very detailed either. He had to have gotten a better look at he/she/it in real life and should be able to get a better description then what we're left to see in the picture.

They say that it was analysed and it can be deduced that there's not enough body mass to be a bigfoot.
There was no muscle mass to speak of; no shoulder width or head definition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Geeze!

Nosferatu! *shakes finger* Tisk Tisk. Silly boy.

Hes always getting himself into trouble. Anyone remember when he was in spongebob, and turning off the lights?

What a guy.

classic episode :tu:

but like people have said the picutre isnt the best of quality could easily b fake or easily b real? or half fake and half real?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They say that it was analysed and it can be deduced that there's not enough body mass to be a bigfoot.

Oh really? I didn't know there were scientific standards in place to measure imaginary creatures against one another.

The photo looks like a person to me. A lonely person in a costume/coat/whatever, but a person none the less. There is no "scientific test" to prove it isn't just a person in the pic, that's a load of crap. It's a BLURRY PICTURE.

Edited by Moonie2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Must have been a warm winter that year.

Looks like a (HUMAN) person walking down a hill. there even appears to be a trail there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a slightly odd photo, so I think I'll sit this one out on the fence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would there be a lone woman walking by herself? And even if so, why would she then suddenly take off in the other direction? It doesn't fit imo. Fact.

So when I go walking in the middle of nowhere by myself (which I often do) I am no longer a woman? When I see other walkers in the middle of nowhere I usually walk the other direction to them because guess what when I'm out there I want to be ALONE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when I go walking in the middle of nowhere by myself (which I often do) I am no longer a woman? When I see other walkers in the middle of nowhere I usually walk the other direction to them because guess what when I'm out there I want to be ALONE.

Nope, you would then be classified as a werewolf or skinny bigfoot.

Nibs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, you would then be classified as a werewolf or skinny bigfoot.

Nibs

more of a loner werewolf or anti social bigfoot, but wait are all werewolves and bigfoots social outcasts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like michael j fox i got to admit.

Howl. :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh really? I didn't know there were scientific standards in place to measure imaginary creatures against one another.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to get at.

If the story had more to it and the photo weren't so unidentifiable, it might be more intriguing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if the researcher is looking for sasquatch, it implies he was out in the wilderness. Why would there be a lone woman walking by herself? And even if so, why would she then suddenly take off in the other direction? It doesn't fit imo. Fact.

Fact? What fact?

Let's see, a woman alone in the woods, comes across a stranger, woman leaves. Choose the reason:

A ) She decided it would be better to leave, as opposed to chance something happening to her.

B ) She was up to no good, saw someone, and decided to leave, as oppsed to being caught.

C ) She realised that she left the oven on, and had to hurry back before her home blew up.

D ) It was a man, dressed like a woman, and the guy with the camera was someone he knew, and didn't want to be found out.

E ) The blurry photo, and vague description actually DO prove a werewolf.

Let's see what option(s) isn't picked.

Edited by MstrMsn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So when I go walking in the middle of nowhere by myself (which I often do) I am no longer a woman? When I see other walkers in the middle of nowhere I usually walk the other direction to them because guess what when I'm out there I want to be ALONE.

Exactly what I was thinking. I find the disbelief that a woman could be out walking in the woods alone just plain silly. Whoever took the photograph was out in the woods too, AND there's a path of sorts coming down the hill, so it's hardly the deep dark untrodden forests.

If I was out taking a walk in the woods and saw some guy with a camera, I would leave the area too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like just someone out for a walk to me too. You have to walk a little funny sometimes when you are going down a muddy hill. That is what I would attribute anything weird in the posture to.

How can anyone know it was a Male Werewolf? The thread title says Male werewolf.

I think the "mane" is just the tree behind the figure.

I would run too, if some nutbar came dashing and shouting out from skulking in the woods and behind bushes, waving a camera. I'd go looking for the cops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually agree with most of the people on here. It does look like a person, and there's really no reason for that person not to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't really look like the posture of a werewolf on its hind legs anyway. The arms are a dead giveaway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The photograph is not blurry at all. It is, perhaps, somewhat vague and "lacking definition" but I think it's clearly a figure of some sort. The idea that the photographer failed to realize that a "washer woman" was in fact the mysterious figure (Why was she in the woods at all?) is preposterous. It could of course be another human figure but there are few people who turn and run at the sight of anyone in their general vicinity. This rules out the jolly hiker out for a stroll theory, which means in my mind there is no doubt that this is either an unidentified creature, or possibly more realistically, one of the "Wildmen" that have become a subcategory of North American Bigfoot sightings. Personally I feel that all genuine Bigfoot sightings are of Wildmen, rather than large primates, and this is hopefully photographic evidence of their continued existence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.