BigTreeWalker

Thinker Thunker William Reeve Interview

179 posts in this topic

<In the comment section of ThinkerThinker's video, Reeve gives information about where the other subjects are (and you'll have to watch ThinkerThunker's version to follow the advice Reeve gives): 

 

“The other two BigFoots are positioned at time

where the upper left corner of letter  "N" in North points to a black spot. The Second BigFoot of the trio is positioned at time
just as the letter H in NORTH fades out; The black spot is indicated at the lower right corner of the letter H. Both objects are moving on their own and changing shape very slightly as if to be observing as the camera pans to right. They both have the same shade density of black as the hero BigFoot that we see clearly running. I believe these are the other Big Foots in the ambush."

>

 

Thanks LT. I watched the interview  but didn't remember him being specific as to when he saw them. I'll watch again when I have time and see if I can find what he is referring to.

 

 

 

<So it sounds like a camera operator was never closer to the herd than 200 yards -- which again suggests either that a zoom lens was in use, or the camera was set up to run unattended for those shots that look like closeup shots.>

 

A remote controlled camera is highly possible. However, after giving it some thought, what Reeve means by "we wouldn't put someone in that sort of danger" is, I'm sure, that they would not be out in the open the way the figure in question is. The close up could come from a camera operated by a person, they could be set up behind a large rock or something that they know the Caribou would go around.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure you can control an iMAX camera remotely. These cameras are highly specialized, big, bulky machines designed to create enormously detailed images -- not to accommodate the needs of camera people in the field and on the run. As Howard Hall says in this interview about a PBS documentary shot with an iMAX, "I needed a much broader selection of lenses and capabilities than were available with the equipment iMAX already had." So he spent years building the special "extras" he needed to get his shots to work. (He was doing underwater photography.)

 

But that's a great point, about positioning oneself in a sheltered, safe spot. That was very likely part of the strategy they used to get the shots they got. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an alternative explanation for why the dark figure appears to be riding something like a bicycle that is moving as fast as the caribou.   .   Male caribou are quite large, and a bigfoot trying to take one down would do like any predator, jump on its back and ride it as it moves forward,  to break the neck or force it down to the ground.    Most predators use the same process to bring a large animal down.   So the figure could be a BF riding a caribou.  With those big sets of horns the safe direction to attack a caribou is from the rear.   

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but aren't there witness accounts where they spoke of the 'gliding' type of gait the creature demonstrated?  

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though it doesn't say anything about this account one way or the other, accounts are uniform on a smoothness and efficiency of movement that sets the thing the witness saw apart from humans.  Bicycling, ice skating, 'walking on eggshells,' and cross-country skiing have all been mentioned as analogues.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought this this would have gone the way of Skookum cast by now.  But thanks for the white lines as it gives a bit of a hint of bike/motor device posture.  

fooin_zpshqyjziah.png

 

Edited by Crowlogic
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wendijo said:

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but aren't there witness accounts where they spoke of the 'gliding' type of gait the creature demonstrated?  

 

 

Yes! As DWA points out, there are many such accounts. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Wendijo said:

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but aren't there witness accounts where they spoke of the 'gliding' type of gait the creature demonstrated?  

 

 

That is correct about others witnessing the smooth motion of bigfoot. I have to wonder if those that think it's a bicycle rider, do they think there is a blacktop road back there? Because I see rough country all through there. It sure wouldn't be a smooth ride! 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Nothing as gliding as being on wheels.  Also it does not have to be a bicycle.  It can be something like this.  Now since the terrain is rough the rider does what many do gets up on legs to help absorb shock.  Ask yourself what is more likely a bigfoot running down the herd or a human on a device that may or may not be connected with the humans filming the whole thing.  Also do you think a hunched over bigfoot bent knee etc could really run that fast.  We human's can't when all bent up.  Fast bibedal running seems to work best upright not bent up or infirm like.  We're never given the exact location so the film site could have very easily been closer to humans than Thunker (who didn't cross examine the witness) was told.

atv_zps6f3l8r63.jpg

Edited by Crowlogic
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason that is "more likely" to you is that you are unable to conceive anything else.  It's obvious to most of us that, considering the on-the-ground, no that's NOT more likely.

 

"Close your minds, stop evaluating evidence, and stop thinking about this" is, as you have seen in ...4,740 POSTS!!!!!!!...not exactly going to discourage analytical people with large experience and thorough grounding in relevant subject matter...who are actually interested.

 

Or...maybe you have not.

Edited by DWA
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^hahaha and I'm  soooo irrelavant and mistaken that you have to count my posts? Kewel!   Well so while you're bird doging me I'll ask the big question  Did you find bigfoot today?  No wait let me save you the embarrassment  of answering.  No you didn't find bigfoot today and you won't tomorrow or any day after.

 

That said what is more likely in your "scientific" mind  a bigfoot, opps woodape charging through the herd ready to tear one apart for lunch or a human on a wheeled device helping the herd along so the camera guys across the river can get the shot?  Now think very hard and bear in mind that motors exist,  wheels exist and the two have been married together for over a century.  And what in tar nation is a bloody wood ape (you know they live in the wood) doing up on the tundra in the first place.  Yessir ye ol' tundra is prime primate country ain't it?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I'm not focusing on your post count.  *you* are focusing on my mention of it...rather than on showing me why I'm wrong.

 

I'm simply pointing out to people that it's unusual to be able to say nothing of interest.  In 4,741 posts.

 

Dude.  I've found bigfoot.  You don't know how to, and have given up.

 

Motors exist?  Wow.  Bigfoot does too.

 

(Wolves and bears are up there on the tundra too.  Same reason:  copious food.  But here is where your not tuning in to relevant information trips you up.  As it does...every post you make.)

Edited by DWA
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^That's the kind of thing 4th graders do DWA.  So you've found bigfoot, woozers.  Well anybody can say anything.  Back it up, deliver the goods.    But you can't, there saved you from the embarrassment a second time. 

 

However while you were writing colored post counts of mine you failed to answer the direct question.  What was more likely, a human on a motor device or a really really real bigfoot running down Caribou?  Dude?  Did you say dude?  Yikes nothing says Bubba like saying dude.  Sorry man never heard that word in higher circles of thought.

 

Lastly about those posts of mine.  You mean you've read all of them and can conclude I've contributed nothing ever.  Nothing in over 4500 posts?  You must find me a rather sharp thorn in the side then.  I've read virtually none of yours except when it involves me.  That's how much attention I pay to your posts.

Edited by Crowlogic
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites