Hunter captures alleged Bigfoot on camera during trip to birch forest

[UM-Bot]

Another video clip of an alleged Sasquatch has appeared online - but is it really an unknown hominid or just a prankster in a suit ?

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/361961/hunter-captures-alleged-bigfoot-on-camera-during-trip-to-birch-forest

[Resume]

Clicks and views.

[jethrofloyd]

Quote

Is this a Bigfoot, a person wearing a costume, or something else ?

A bigfoot in a bigfoot costume?

[DreadLordAvatar]

Great footage. It looks legit.

[jethrofloyd]

32 minutes ago, DreadLordAvatar said:

Great footage. It looks legit.

If it's legit it's the best 'bigfoot' footage since Patterson-Gimlin film.

[Portre]

The creature walks looking down at the ground, as if it were somebody in a gorilla suit carefully watching each step so as not trip.

[jethrofloyd]

The creature's gait, look down at the ground and creature's thickness reminds me of Paul Freeman's bigfoot hoax.

[the13bats]

I will have to go with hoax the suit looks even worse than my 60 buck gorilla costume from the halloween store, it doesnt act like a wild creature but it does act like a  dolt in a fur suit.

These hoaxes are iladvised as some rube might just shoot you.

[Gumball]

Why is he trying to hide behind a tree thinner than my arm?

[jethrofloyd]

As I said it's a quite similar in a posture to the Paul Freeman's 'bigfoot' footage.

 

[the13bats]

2 hours ago, jethrofloyd said:

As I said it's a quite similar in a posture to the Paul Freeman's 'bigfoot' footage.

 

I really do think these guys buy cheap suits and have a blast seeing who is silly enough to fall for it.

[Jon the frog]

Hunter didn't shot bigfoot because it was his buddy ?

[Davros of Skaro]

The eerie music lets you know it's real.

[MGB]

It would be easy enough to go to where he filmed it and go to the trees the figure walked past and measure them, since they had definitive marks. If it is 7 or 8 foot that would bolster his video.

[tortugabob]

Jeez these guys and the cheap monkey suit videos get old.

[the13bats]

23 hours ago, MGB said:

It would be easy enough to go to where he filmed it and go to the trees the figure walked past and measure them, since they had definitive marks. If it is 7 or 8 foot that would bolster his video.

Since they dont exist lets pretend for a moment this is a real bigfoot, where its walking there would be at least a chance it left tracks but more important if it was a real creature 100% no question it did leave DNA did the camera person go find samples? No, of course not.

Some true believers who no not understand DNA will bray about alleged bigfoot DNA that is "human but not human" no, it doesnt work like that.

DNA is at the point that it will prove Bigfoot doesnt exist because of a total lack of proof otherwise.

 

[MGB]

8 minutes ago, the13bats said:

Since they dont exist lets pretend for a moment this is a real bigfoot, where its walking there would be at least a chance it left tracks but more important if it was a real creature 100% no question it did leave DNA did the camera person go find samples? No, of course not.

Some true believers who no not understand DNA will bray about alleged bigfoot DNA that is "human but not human" no, it doesnt work like that.

DNA is at the point that it will prove Bigfoot doesnt exist because of a total lack of proof otherwise.

 

True. You cannot say the DNA belongs to bigfoot when there Isn't one to compare it to.

[stereologist]

9 hours ago, MGB said:

True. You cannot say the DNA belongs to bigfoot when there Isn't one to compare it to.

You can determine if the DNA is from a primate, a monkey, a lesser ape, a great ape, a hominid.

DNA contains codings and those codings can be matched up to various forms of life. If BF exists and that DNA is found then we could place that DNA into its clade. We could see the evolutionary origin of BF and how long ago it branched off from other creatures similar to it.

A good example of this was finding the finger bone of a Denisovan. It was shown to be its own species. No extant Denisovan was needed to determine that it was Denisovan.

In fact, that work as earned a Nobel prize this year

https://www.snexplores.org/article/nobel-prize-physiology-medicine-2022-svante-paabo-human-evolution-neandertal-genetics

Quote

Pääbo is a geneticist who works at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. In 2006, he worked out how to extract and analyze DNA from ancient bones. That led to uncovering small genetic differences between humans and their extinct human relatives. 

 

[the13bats]

On 11/18/2022 at 11:32 AM, stereologist said:

You can determine if the DNA is from a primate, a monkey, a lesser ape, a great ape, a hominid.

DNA contains codings and those codings can be matched up to various forms of life. If BF exists and that DNA is found then we could place that DNA into its clade. We could see the evolutionary origin of BF and how long ago it branched off from other creatures similar to it.

A good example of this was finding the finger bone of a Denisovan. It was shown to be its own species. No extant Denisovan was needed to determine that it was Denisovan.

In fact, that work as earned a Nobel prize this year

https://www.snexplores.org/article/nobel-prize-physiology-medicine-2022-svante-paabo-human-evolution-neandertal-genetics

 

This is why its so riduculous when some true believer who doesnt grasp DNA brays they found DNA that is 99% human so it proved bigfoot exists.

[Myles]

On 11/18/2022 at 2:02 AM, the13bats said:

Since they dont exist lets pretend for a moment this is a real bigfoot, where its walking there would be at least a chance it left tracks but more important if it was a real creature 100% no question it did leave DNA did the camera person go find samples? No, of course not.

Some true believers who no not understand DNA will bray about alleged bigfoot DNA that is "human but not human" no, it doesnt work like that.

DNA is at the point that it will prove Bigfoot doesnt exist because of a total lack of proof otherwise.

 

Yep, another case of the person knowing exactly where a big hairy animal trudged through the woods and them not getting a hair.  thistles are abundant in the woods and hairs would easily be found.

[the13bats]

On 11/21/2022 at 7:02 AM, Myles said:

Yep, another case of the person knowing exactly where a big hairy animal trudged through the woods and them not getting a hair.  thistles are abundant in the woods and hairs would easily be found.

Its actually a case of the cameraman knew it was his buddy.

[Trelane]

I'm not seeing anything about anyone returning to the area to look for hair, prints, scat or anything to corroborate the alleged sighting. Not surprised at all.

Throw this in the bin with all the other garbage that gets rolled out as "proof".

[Trelane]

[+DieChecker]

This has all the hallmarks of a hoax. The creature shows up Directly In Front of the guy. Like it was waiting and and the camera guy knew where to go. He hides behind a tiny tree, like that would help. and holds the camera so it is partially blocked by close by branches. Couldn't lift it up a couple feet for a clear view eh? And the creature moves almost in an arc across the outside edge of the field, to get a view, but to also be partly hidden. AND, IMHO, the most damning. The creature is all one color. Like he just took a bath, or wearing clean clothes. A creature that lives outside would have shades of color, where some dirt got on it, or it rubbed a tree, or wiped a hand. Yet it is completely clean. 

Id like to see the camera person put the camera on the tree and then walk to the point of where the creature was and see how tall it really was. Also, knowing these kinds of trees, and how big they get, I can't image this thing is tremendously big, or tall. I'd guess just under six feet tall. Also, having made videos in the woods, the apparent depth can be deceptive. This thing may have only been 100 feet away, and EASILY would have heard this guy approaching in the brush/dry grass.

Just saying...

[the13bats]

On 11/25/2022 at 3:53 PM, DieChecker said:

This has all the hallmarks of a hoax. The creature shows up Directly In Front of the guy. Like it was waiting and and the camera guy knew where to go. He hides behind a tiny tree, like that would help. and holds the camera so it is partially blocked by close by branches. Couldn't lift it up a couple feet for a clear view eh? And the creature moves almost in an arc across the outside edge of the field, to get a view, but to also be partly hidden. AND, IMHO, the most damning. The creature is all one color. Like he just took a bath, or wearing clean clothes. A creature that lives outside would have shades of color, where some dirt got on it, or it rubbed a tree, or wiped a hand. Yet it is completely clean. 

Id like to see the camera person put the camera on the tree and then walk to the point of where the creature was and see how tall it really was. Also, knowing these kinds of trees, and how big they get, I can't image this thing is tremendously big, or tall. I'd guess just under six feet tall. Also, having made videos in the woods, the apparent depth can be deceptive. This thing may have only been 100 feet away, and EASILY would have heard this guy approaching in the brush/dry grass.

Just saying...

We each take what is presented to us and make up our own minds based on evidence or lack thereof, of course this is a hoax.

And sure after over 40 years of interest and research in the bigfoot phenomenon im a bit jaded and cynical afterall all we have are stories just because a person seems sincere doesnt make it so most con artists are very sincere.

The typical "story" is a person claims to have seen "something" and they dont know what it really is so they make an unsupported leap from unknown to it must be xxxxx ( paranormal whatever ) thats a huge issue because we cant real an absolute conclusion from "unknown" its just guessing based on nothing many times these folks will say if we saw what they saw we would be believers too, how very arrogant to assume others are as credulous as they are. it would seem some folks cant admit they didnt know.

They seldom almost never follow up as in look for tracks or hair etc. At this point i just apply commen sense, with all the stories and no supporting evidence there is no bigfoot, all the money and time spent by not just hobbyists but teevee shows too and no bigfoot.

People ask for proof and there never is any but the skeptic is always the bad guy.