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 1
Monster-Finder

Bigfoot head-shot photo with kid and red eyes

77 posts in this topic

I'VE ADDED MY FAMOUS RED LINES to show the baby head, in profile,

and the eyes of Momma (and Papa) and the basic face.

MOre detail at http://www.beckjord.com/bigfoottribephotos

Jon-Erik Beckjord( I have a name) Director,

Sasquatch Research Project seeker@stealthaccess.net

PHOTO IS CROPPED, FROM MASTER PHOTO, SHOT AT 125 FT WITH CHEAP

110 CAMERA. Grain is from scanning.

original.gifalien.gif

post-9-1070147456.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don’t take this the wrong way, but after 28 years you still haven’t got a descent camera? huh.gif No offence, but this image could be absolutely anything!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote that it is cousin IT! Hehe...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all your images seem to be grasping at straws as to what is depicted...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please don’t take this the wrong way, but after 28 years you still haven’t got a descent camera? huh.gif No offence, but this image could be absolutely anything!

wacko.gif

1)Suggest you read the related site before posting....

(small bonk)

2) in case you did not know, almost NOBODY has ever gotten BF photos....

did you assume one can just walk out and tke one?

3) Who said I took it???

devil.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
all your images seem to be grasping at straws as to what is depicted...

Please show me YOUR photos.....

whistling2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[ thats some weird stuff. its just a camera malfunction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not worth a reply.

Now go out and get your own photos, and impress us all.

blink.gif

Edit: removed unnecessary quote. MF, please refrain from quoting entire posts in your message, especially when the referenced quote is immediately above your response.

Edited by Magikman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please show me YOUR photos.....

what does that have to do with anything? its almost as though you have the mentality of a 5 year old child, it seems that your prerequisites for finding faces in horid photos is the good old two dark splodges with a dark splodge underneath..i should start posting pictures of ink splodges, outline the part i think looks like a face, and then claim that its evidence of a spirit manifesting its self.

Don't give me the "Oh have you done field work? Oh does anyone know who you are?" treatment, because quite frankly it does nothing but prove that you are floundering when criticism is presented.

Want me to repost the image of you in which i found a face which looks quite similar to one depicted on your site?

I wouldn't have a problem if you accepted criticism constructively, but all you seem to do is follow this arguement "I've been in the field 28 years, I'm Right, You are Wrong, look at my degrees, BONK"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please don’t take this the wrong way, but after 28 years you still haven’t got a descent camera? huh.gif No offence, but this image could be absolutely anything!

Camera was a Kodak 110 for the lady who took the photo.

Please READ the related website.

Hope you understand that aliens or Bigfoot

DO NOT POSE FOR YOU.

They show up by accident in your photos.

alien.gifdevil.gifalien.gifdevil.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will repeat...

I did not take the photo.

Where does it say I did?

But for the format, and distance and enlargement amount, it is damn good!

grin2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit: removed unnecessary quote.

That enlargement amount is good? Have you even taken any photography courses? I've taken both B&W (darkroom stuff, very fun), and color photography courses. I know for a fact from those courses it is very possible to get better enlargments then that and much better GRAIN.

Edited by Magikman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not worth a reply.

Now go out and get your own photos, and impress us all.

and there we have it, a child trapped in an adult body.

I don't need to go out and get my own photos to know that what you are claiming in your 'great' photos is a load of crap. Your inability to take criticism further shows how childish you really are. Not worth a reply? Of course, such trivial things as people questioning your lifes work and what I assume to be the bulk of what you have done over the years isn't worth a reply:) It only harms you..

post-9-1070180002.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HAHA! It's the child inside him trying to escape him! The scary thing is how he got the child inside him... blink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note to all: please refrain from personal attacks or this one will be closed.

Thank you for your cooperation. thumbsup.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an interesting photograph, but as with most photographs of 'bigfeet', there are some major problems that cannot be ignored.

First and foremost, is that if someone else took the picture, then you have no guarantee that that person didn't fabricate it. Most of the story here relies upon the reliability of the witness. There's also the very real possibility, that the 'bigfoot' in the picture isn't a bigfoot at all, and is simply part of a tree or something similarly mundane.

I have to say that I agree with what most people are saying in that it's not a particularly convincing photograph in any case. There's a vague outline of something, and an object that looks like the sun is hitting it, but no clearly discernable animal features. I don't see anything that looks like an infant on the right hand side either unfortunately.

The next day, on a hike up to the ridge, we found another single track in the pine needles, similar to the one by the pond. We also found a flat area under some pines,  where there were 6-8  conical piles of  pine-nut debris, each 3-4 feet tall.

This was far too organized and large for squirrels to do.

I'm not saying that I know for a fact that the person who took the picture hoaxed it, but it cannot be ignored that if she had done, this type of evidence would have been extremely easy to plant at the scene.

To conclude, this isn't very different for the vast body of bigfoot sightings that are reported each year. It comprises of a witness account, with an inconclusive photograph, a track, and some debris that doesn't really prove anything.

In the end, any photograph is insufficient evidence to prove the existance of bigfoot, especially when it is vague to start with. It's an interesting witness report with some possible physical evidence, but i'm afraid it isn't going to convince any mainstream scientists of the existence of these creatures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here Here Saruman!! I agree wih you.

When I look at saposed crypto pics, I try to look at them with an open mind. Some are quite convincing, and some are easy to read as fakes. The rest are"I have no clue what they are." Monster-Finders pics are in the "I have no clue what they are." catagory. Thats just MY opinion anyway.

thumbsup.gifthumbsup.gif to all of you with an open mind!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all things that I do, it is important to look inside myself and question what my motives are, and the consequences for my actions. I have to remind myself of this every day, and sometimes I forget it and it gets the better of me, like it did recently. I've always wanted to know the Sasquatch, and run around in the wild with them, like Tarzan. It might sound silly but I always thought it'd be such a great life.

Over time I have changed from wanting the Sasquatch to exist to knowing they exist. I cannot prove they do, but knowing that someone would have to kill one in order to prove they exist is not acceptable to me. I was able to get to know them through meditation, and not only has the experience left me with awe but it has changed my life for the better. I am far from perfect, but I am learning every day just how majical this world really is.

I would love to share the techniques I use for meditation with anybody who is interested. There is a great reason why some people have such a strong interest in Sasquatch, something is calling their hearts. If you are interested please leave me a private message, it will directly contact my email. I do not charge anything for helping people. I do not think I will be here on these boards because I've decided to take a break for a month or two. This place is great, but I have a lot of work to do and trying to reach peole here takes a lot of energy and time. God bless you all and I hope to hear from you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Edit: removed unnecessary quote.

That enlargement amount is good? Have you even taken any photography courses? I've taken both B&W (darkroom stuff, very fun), and color photography courses. I know for a fact from those courses it is very possible to get better enlargments then that and much better GRAIN.

At 200 x?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here Here Saruman!! I agree wih you.

When I look at saposed crypto pics, I try to look at them with an open mind. Some are quite convincing, and some are easy to read as fakes. The rest are"I have no clue what they are." Monster-Finders pics are in the "I have no clue what they are." catagory. Thats just MY opinion anyway.

thumbsup.gifthumbsup.gif to all of you with an open mind!

Then come with us on our next expedition there and be Bigfoot Bait...

they come out for women. original.giforiginal.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it enlarged by 200 x? or did you mean film speed as in 200 asa?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Note to all: please refrain from personal attacks or this one will be closed.

Thank you for your cooperation. thumbsup.gif

Agent Smith --

I am a moderator. I run my own forum at http://www.bigfootforums.net

the way to go is to not close a thread, but dump the bad posts, warn the poster,

and sometimes, as an extreme case, dump the poster.

I do.

You do not sink the ship to chase the rats out. You catch the rats.

With best regards,

Jon-Erik rolleyes.gifgrin2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's an interesting photograph, but as with most photographs of 'bigfeet', there are some major problems that cannot be ignored.

First and foremost, is that if someone else took the picture, then you have no guarantee that that person didn't fabricate it. Most of the story here relies upon the reliability of the witness. There's also the very real possibility, that the 'bigfoot' in the picture isn't a bigfoot at all, and is simply part of a tree or something similarly mundane.

I have to say that I agree with what most people are saying in that it's not a particularly convincing photograph in any case. There's a vague outline of something, and an object that looks like the sun is hitting it, but no clearly discernable animal features. I don't see anything that looks like an infant on the right hand side either unfortunately.

The next day, on a hike up to the ridge, we found another single track in the pine needles, similar to the one by the pond. We also found a flat area under some pines,  where there were 6-8  conical piles of  pine-nut debris, each 3-4 feet tall.

This was far too organized and large for squirrels to do.

I'm not saying that I know for a fact that the person who took the picture hoaxed it, but it cannot be ignored that if she had done, this type of evidence would have been extremely easy to plant at the scene.

To conclude, this isn't very different for the vast body of bigfoot sightings that are reported each year. It comprises of a witness account, with an inconclusive photograph, a track, and some debris that doesn't really prove anything.

In the end, any photograph is insufficient evidence to prove the existance of bigfoot, especially when it is vague to start with. It's an interesting witness report with some possible physical evidence, but i'm afraid it isn't going to convince any mainstream scientists of the existence of these creatures.

O GREAT SARUMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please read the website, which goes into all the issues you raised.

We went there, we tested, we did comparison photos, and

WE GOT MORE PHOTOS....... YEAR AFTER YEAR.

HTTP://WWW.beckjord.com/bigfoottribephotos

see pix. ONE SAMPLE OF 17.

post-9-1070261690.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the way to go is to not close a thread, but dump the bad posts, warn the poster,

and sometimes, as an extreme case, dump the poster.

I appreciate your moderating lesson, Jon-Erik. However, this forum is not your forum and it will be run as the administrator and his moderating team sees fit.

Thank you for your guidelines, though. thumbsup.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please read the website, which goes into all the issues you raised.

Really the only issue I raised above is that there is a very real possibility that what your photograph(s) show is not evidence of bigfoot or aliens. I personally do not think they've been deliberately faked, but I do think that your interpretation of them is somewhat questionnable.

Near the bottom of your page you wrote:

These are the real deal. No models, no artwork. Not  photos of models, not photos of drawings. Actual "EBE"s (visiting) or maybe unknown animals.

There is still that third possibility that you haven't mentioned there, or anywhere else on your site - that the pictures, although not deliberately fake, simply do not show bigfoot, aliens or anything else mysterious. A good idea would be to provide a paragraph or two on there discussing both that possibility, and your own reasons behind interpreting them in the way that you do.

I for one would be very interested to hear exactly what it is about these pictures that leads you to conclude that the vague shapes and outlines you've highlighted are more than just random patterns in the trees and foliage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.