BigTreeWalker Posted June 23, 2016 Author Share Posted June 23, 2016 Really, all that shows me is the nature of the bigfoot community as a whole... If they didn't see it or experience it themselves then it didn't happen. Forget about working together to solve this thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTreeWalker Posted June 23, 2016 Author Share Posted June 23, 2016 Forgive me if I seem a little cynical. Because I have personally experienced that very attitude. You know what goes along with it... No one's as good as I am at figuring this out. Talk about arrogance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Its not a part of the film crew, its not a Bear. Its not hunting Caribou with a rifle...... Its an all black Hominoid hundreds of miles into the wilderness hunting Caribou with its bare hands. Its Bear Grylls. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 I agree, the William Reeve interview is a great interview, BigTreeWalker. Keep on keepin' on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted June 24, 2016 Admin Share Posted June 24, 2016 (edited) Forgive me for not being up to date on this video... I didn't see a link to the original anywhere on this thread, so it's impossible to come to a firm opinion. From what Rockape posted, it does look like a person with a backpack or hunting gear. One concern about "speed" of the subject, even without the benefit of seeing the original, is that the frame rate can be easily manipulated and anyone can make even a broken down old man as me look as fast as Usain Bolt on video. Even plain old windows Movie Maker software allows manipulation of frame rates, etc. You need the original video, with all of the codec parameters intact in order to validate "speed". Is there a link to the original? Are the parameters of the recording available? Edited June 24, 2016 by gigantor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 https://www.amazon.com/GREAT-NORTH-IMAX/dp/B00005UM39/175-7742838-9220423?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0 Its an Imax nature documentary.....there is no skullduggery here. And its not a hunter with a backpack on according to the camera man who worked on the film. They had two choppers they worked with. There was no humans in the area other than themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTreeWalker Posted June 24, 2016 Author Share Posted June 24, 2016 Sorry gigantor, my bad. Nobody said anything about my not posting the link and I didn't even notice. Really sorry about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 I didn't post this for Thinker Thunker's review. Regardless of what you think of him. I posted for the insight from Mr Reeve who was there. I'm sorry some might not like the format of the interview, I think it's good because the interviewer wasn't constantly interrupting and changing track. Since he covers the issues and "theories" of most of the armchair critics, I find it funny that these things are still being parroted back here. This wasn't about Thinker Thunker or his critique of the movie, it was about listening to a person that was there and his take on the matter.CM, he discusses the fauna in the area. Since being there he is more qualified to talk of it than you are.Cattown, he also mentions the four wheeler (moped) idea that he found funny, as do I. (Make that hilarious!)It's been awhile since I have watched any critiques of this film. But, I found it interesting that Mr Reeves pointed out two other individuals that were in the area. Thats because photos and video offer nothing of value Only as far as proof goes. If and when bigfoot is proven to exist; it has the same value as a documentary about caribou and other animals in this area does. It addresses range, habitat, behavior in front of a stampede. I will offer here that they may have been simply foraging in the area and were interrupted by the caribou.If someone is interested in doing a good critique of this by not using bad YouTube footage; a Blu-ray of the Imax film is available here for about $12.http://www.barnesandnoble.com/p/dvd-great-north-martin-j-dignard/5900563/2673945737201?st=PLA&sid=BNB_DRS_Marketplace+Shopping+Media_00000000&2sid=Google_&sourceId=PLGoP6857&k_clickid=3x6857 I suspect him being there is not all that important to the discussion, per se, but to an attitude you would like to present. Nor is my response... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted June 24, 2016 Moderator Share Posted June 24, 2016 BTW - You're correct, you've seen the nature of the community as a whole. Unfortunately. Thanks for posting this. The motion / figure Mr Reeve describes and the closeup remind me a lot of the Memorial Day footage which, scoftic opinion not withstanding, I'm inclined to accept at least 'til much stronger evidence against it than I've ever seen is presented. There seems little room for openmindedness and honest inquiry. If you're not a scoftic JREFer you have to be a kool aid swilling woo-****. Too many disallow the very science they claim to demand: Rather than look to the evidence to see what it says they try to dictate what that evidence is allowed to say. None the less, you are doing good work. Keep it up. MIB 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTreeWalker Posted June 24, 2016 Author Share Posted June 24, 2016 Okay Cryptic. Now that I posted the link you can watch the interview. Reeves being there does pertain because he was witness to the setting and the circumstances behind the filming. The backstory is as important as what was filmed, because it helps eliminate the guess work that is going on. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Right. This was not shot by a 13 yr old in his backyard in New Jersey. This is a Nat Geo style documentary shot for Imax about the north American artic. This is the stuff skeptics ask for. Of course me being cynical of film Im not holding my breath. But I think its safe to say we can rule out hoax or photoshop. I also think its safe to say we can rule out natural knowns such as Bear, etc. If its Bear Grylls? How did he get there? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 I have to say, after seeing this, it doesn't look like someone with a backpack. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 I have to say, after seeing this, it doesn't look like someone with a backpack. The word crazy monkey comes to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 (edited) Person on a motorized transport. 3 wheeler, 4 wheeler, or 2 wheeler. The progress of the thing is too linear. That is to say there is no sense of step thrust but more like something on wheels. Nevertheless it's no better than the Memorial Day footage or even Freeman. It's too short and too far away. Thinking it's a bigfoot is next to silly. Edited June 24, 2016 by Crowlogic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Watch the interview....it is NOT a person on a moped or anything like that. You would need a helo to fly it in there. The linear motion and the crouching reminds me of some one stalking their prey. Im not going to say its a Bigfoot either. Its the arctic. But its not one of the film crew, they are hundreds of miles from no where....who could it be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts