Guest Crowlogic Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 Very, very frustrating that the figure isn't just a little more detailed! The back story seems to be ligitimate and everything else adds up - professional film crew, remote, very hard to access location, witness on the scene who is knowledgeable of wildlife and the area and very unlikely to be perpetrating a hoax. If this was shot just a little closer and at better detail it could be very convincing indeed. As it is, unfortunately it goes in the pile of interesting but ultimately still unknown........... Professional film crew is not a sure thing. There is an equally poor video of a supposed bigfoot crossing a road at night and the video was made by a professional film crew. Junk is junk no matter who filmed it. This is a Imax quality film that won the Pasedena film festival. Its not junk...... This is what you guys have been asking for right????? If Bigfoot is real why hasn't Natgeo filmed it yet? We have all heard it a million times. Well there right there on the film is a hominoid anamoly in the middle of a Caribou herd. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0285154/ Its not the smoking gun of course because short of a body there is no such thing obviously. But you skeptics are no more interested in evidence than the man in the moon. Here are the facts....it was shot in remote northern Quebec. Its not a man on a moped. Its not a part of the film crew. Its dressed in all black, its not carrying a rifle. And it seems to be stalking Caribou. Its certainly compelling to me. One more time. It's too short, too distant and way way way too undetailed. We're essentially looking at a black blob with a pimple on top. Gee it's a classic blobsquatch. When I call for quality graphic evidence I'm talking about this kind of quality. Thunker managed to serve up a big bowl of blobsquatch and that's why that video shot 20+ years ago has not gone viral when it first happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1980squatch Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 The motions and build seem very human like to me. This one is not compelling to me in the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTreeWalker Posted June 25, 2016 Author Share Posted June 25, 2016 Crow, if we got a picture like that there would still be something wrong with it. Or the picture taker himself jay walked the other day. Sarcasm intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 (edited) build seem very human like to me. That's what I have always thought about this one. Edited June 25, 2016 by Rockape Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 I have to say, after seeing this, it doesn't look like someone with a backpack. Looks like it's dragging a small animal then throws it over it's shoulder with it's right hand. Trail bike and water bottle or back pack or sling. The body doesn't turn. It comes up the hill, shuffles sideways and backs back down the hill. I do see what you think you are seeing, but it is hilarious to think there was a dude on a bike attempting to have a run in with a herd of caribou. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 Wasn't this discussed extensively two or three years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 Very, very frustrating that the figure isn't just a little more detailed! The back story seems to be ligitimate and everything else adds up - professional film crew, remote, very hard to access location, witness on the scene who is knowledgeable of wildlife and the area and very unlikely to be perpetrating a hoax. If this was shot just a little closer and at better detail it could be very convincing indeed. As it is, unfortunately it goes in the pile of interesting but ultimately still unknown...........Professional film crew is not a sure thing. There is an equally poor video of a supposed bigfoot crossing a road at night and the video was made by a professional film crew. Junk is junk no matter who filmed it.This is a Imax quality film that won the Pasedena film festival. Its not junk...... This is what you guys have been asking for right????? If Bigfoot is real why hasn't Natgeo filmed it yet? We have all heard it a million times. Well there right there on the film is a hominoid anamoly in the middle of a Caribou herd.http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0285154/Its not the smoking gun of course because short of a body there is no such thing obviously. But you skeptics are no more interested in evidence than the man in the moon.Here are the facts....it was shot in remote northern Quebec. Its not a man on a moped. Its not a part of the film crew. Its dressed in all black, its not carrying a rifle. And it seems to be stalking Caribou.Its certainly compelling to me. One more time. It's too short, too distant and way way way too undetailed. We're essentially looking at a black blob with a pimple on top. Gee it's a classic blobsquatch. When I call for quality graphic evidence I'm talking about this kind of quality. Thunker managed to serve up a big bowl of blobsquatch and that's why that video shot 20+ years ago has not gone viral when it first happened. Looks like the PGF to me........so save me your quality schpel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 Wasn't this discussed extensively two or three years ago? Im sure it was. What makes this thread different is the camera man was just made aware of his films presence in the Bigfoot world. He was unaware of the anomaly in his film. So with this interview we now have his insight into what it was or wasnt. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 Wasn't this discussed extensively two or three years ago? Yes it was, and I think someone claimed to have contacted somebody who was with the film company, and they said it was probably a film crew member, but I don't recall any names. Now we have the Man who was in charge of the filming telling us it was not a crew member, and that he himself thinks it is probably a bigfoot and or he thinks it makes more sense that it was, instead of a crew member. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 (edited) Thank you for the informing past several postings. Appreciate your sharing knowledgeable info woven with logic. It was welcomed.I also appreciate the new dialogue from the film maker, too. It caps off the previous discussion, nicely. Still nothing satisfying about any bit of this, don't let's ever accept bigfoot as a default conclusion. If that's the case, show me something. Not stories, not tales, not regaling experiences. But if one concludes personal experiences with sasquatch/bigfoot, claims of knowledge require proof. Sorry, I'm not even requesting such. Don't claim I need proof. I am saying if you claim surety, so do I. After nearly fifty years of reports, nothing you can say will convince me. I was 13 when I saw P/G/F on the evening news. I remember it vividly. It didn't make much of a ripple in my adult family, at the time. Edited June 25, 2016 by Incorrigible1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 (edited) Crow, if we got a picture like that there would still be something wrong with it. Or the picture taker himself jay walked the other day. Sarcasm intended. Please I won't trade sarcasm with you because I'd feel like I'm dealing with someone unarmed. However there's not she slightest chance we'll ever get a bigfoot on camera with the details I demand. Not because there aren't equipped and talented camera wielding footers and woods folk but because there is nothing there to get on camera. The bigfoot community is so starved for solid images that a guy like Thunker can acquire a hunk of tripe like he put up and there's enough wishful/wantful people out there to swallow it up. Frankly there are way better judged to be fake bigfoot photos and videos around that blow Thunker out of the water. Edited June 25, 2016 by Crowlogic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 Looks like a black caribou to me. As it turns away you can see the raised tail...typical of a running caribou. t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted June 25, 2016 BFF Patron Share Posted June 25, 2016 Crow is back and "demanding" better pictures from someone like BTW that actually does field work? Be careful what you ask for Crow. BTW is one person that might get something you cannot explain away. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted June 25, 2016 Moderator Share Posted June 25, 2016 ^^^^^ I doubt it. Never underestimate the Crow's power to ignore reality. MIB 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 As an objective observation I need to address a detail in the video. In the area of the supposed head there is a small whitish artifact on what may be seen as the face. It reminded me of the eye slit in the mask of a guillie suit. In other words I'm not ready to call the figure a Sasquatch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts