[Merged] Interesting possible Bigfoot pic

[DieChecker 18,175]

http://squatchdetective.com/VtTrailCam.htm

Supposedly they had a photo expert look at the pic and conclude that the shadows indicate it is a real animal in the position it appears to be in.

Appears to be much larger then a normal human.

Some people have said it is an Owl with its back to the camera and some say it is a bear. Any other opinions?

I think it looks amazingly like what a bigfoot might look like in such a position.

[Mr.United_Nations 2,670]

A bear?

[~TheBigK~ 572]

Hmm, it does look a bit like an owl.

I'm curious though, it said it was taken in September '10? Why is this only now just getting out? And if it has been floating around, and people thought it was legitimate, you would think we'd have heard about it by now.

[The Silver Thong 4,323]

This possibly

http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://www.camo-store.com/Free%2520Stuff/Images/Articles%2520-%2520Sniper%2520Camo%25201.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.camo-store.com/Free%2520Stuff/Sniper%2520Camouflage%2520Techniques.htm&h=256&w=250&sz=25&tbnid=3vUhSObsPr4m7M:&tbnh=111&tbnw=108&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dsniper%2Bcamo%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=sniper+camo&usg=__aKVsbrxC-LxShDigfeEaKIILUiI=&sa=X&ei=Gm_ATcfNGYHagAfpoPjuBQ&ved=0CB8Q9QEwAg

[Bracket 60]

Looks like a guy in a gillie suit to me.

[Drj312 4]

gillie suit was the first thing i thought of

[Left-Field 555]

Some people have said it is an Owl with its back to the camera and some say it is a bear. Any other opinions?

I'm thinking it's the owl.

[Still Waters 25,727]

It could be facing the camera with its head down and the bulging parts are its thighs. Almost like a cat when it's drinking milk.

A wild boar? One foot looks a bit like a pig's trotter to me.

[wmbuzz 0]

Hi guys! 1st time poster. I don't know? but I see a head, a face and a black tube-like neck.

The pic is very interesting. I was leaning towards of it being phony because the neck looks so unnatural. Went back at it, and noticed it might be she, who looks like it might be carrying something under her belly like the apes do with their young. Still undecided because of the neck.

Edited May 3, 2011 by wmbuzz

[wmbuzz 0]

Hi guys! 1st time poster. I don't know? but I see a head, a face and a black tube-like neck.

The pic is very interesting. I was leaning towards of it being phony because the neck looks so unnatural. Went back at it, and noticed it might be she, who looks like it might be carrying something under her belly, like the apes do with their young. Still undecided because of the neck.

[Mike G 126]

Ewww, since when did Bigfoot get mange?

[Sakari 9,740]

His picture of Deer have 3 consecutive pictures, meaning when his camera is triggered, it takes 3 shots.....

Why only one shot of this?...Where are the other 2?

Big sign of hoax right there.....They took the best of the 3

[Shiloh17 1,385]

Maybe it's just me, but those don't look like apple trees. And even if they are, apples don't fall, then roll that

far away from the tree as depicted in the deer pictures. The guy posing like bigfoot at the same tree appears to be near an evergreen and not an apple tree.

Edited May 4, 2011 by Realm

[Sakari 9,740]

Maybe it's just me, but those don't look like apple trees. And even if they are, apples don't fall, then roll that

far away from the tree as depicted in the deer pictures. The guy posing like bigfoot at the same tree appears to be near an evergreen and not an apple tree.

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...

Edited May 4, 2011 by Sakari

[Shiloh17 1,385]

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....

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...

I agree with you. A fake.

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

[Sakari 9,740]

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...

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....

[Shiloh17 1,385]

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.squatchdetective.com/VtTrailCam.htm

Edited May 4, 2011 by Realm

[Sakari 9,740]

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 9,740]

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

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 May 4, 2011 by Sakari

[undertheflow 1]

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

At least they seem open to more plausible theories.

[Sakari 9,740]

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~ 572]

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 9,740]

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 May 4, 2011 by Sakari

[~TheBigK~ 572]

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 80]

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