norseman Posted 20 hours ago Admin Posted 20 hours ago I always thought the skull shape was similar to Patty. If its a fake?👏
xspider1 Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago I don't see the 'perfect fit' with a human skeleton that thunker sees. And, I don't 'finally know that this is some dude or a gal in a monkey suit' based on that analysis. Is Bigfoot highly intelligent? Do we know that it wouldn't run across a clearing? Too many people are trying to speculate what Bigfeet are, what they are not and what they would or would not ever do, imo.
Backdoc Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago (edited) Let me start by saying flat out I never felt this MD Footage was real and always thought it was a hoax. I do have to defend it on TT's analysis: TT's blow-up-skeleton analysis is trying to squeeze too much out of the blurry, ill-defind image. It is asking too much out of the availible image. If the image was pretty well defined then any overlay might be OK. I agree with TT's comments how the figure just happens to run by an open field on a busy holiday full of people. This is not expected for a reclusive, smart animal. Yet, sometimes that is exactly what happens in real life. A good consideration but that is not absolute. People have nature sightings and often have them because the animal in question does come out into the open usually moving into hiding shortly after. I remember seeing this on Discovery/ They correctly asked Q about the very end of the run where it seems the figure lifted a mask off its head. Maybe or maybe not. That makes more sense then having to squeeze out reasons like the idea of the Bigfoot lifting a child bigfoot off the back. TT's deserves credit for trying but it doesn't seem like it is a fair test. Edited 9 hours ago by Backdoc
norseman Posted 8 hours ago Admin Posted 8 hours ago I see the same head shape. The creature up in Washington does appear smaller. Peaked head and heavy brow ridge.
TD-40 Posted 8 hours ago Author Posted 8 hours ago I agree with what has been said about this blurry image and how it does not work well with this sort of analysis. I like PDNA analysis that TT developed but it does not work with this blurry of an image. So we have a subject that ran faster than a Univ. of Washington college athlete across a mountainside with great stride and great acuity, while wearing a big suit (not available at Walmart). And was running high up where nobody would get a good view of it even if they happened to see it. I want to know who these hoaxers are. I conclude that the MD footage was not a hoax.
Backdoc Posted 6 hours ago Posted 6 hours ago (edited) 2 hours ago, TD-40 said: I agree with what has been said about this blurry image and how it does not work well with this sort of analysis. I like PDNA analysis that TT developed but it does not work with this blurry of an image. So we have a subject that ran faster than a Univ. of Washington college athlete across a mountainside with great stride The runner easily ran faster than the 'Bigfoot' in the film. I must be reading this wrong. Are you saying you are under the impression the 'Bigfoot' ran FASTER (?) than the elite sprinter? It didn't. If 'Bigfoot' ran faster than the elite runner there would be little doubt to me this must have been animal and no man in a suit. The runner wasn't even in a suit but running clothes. Now the fact the runner ran faster than the 'Bigfoot' could mean 1) it is a hoaxing man in a suit or 2) It could still be Bigfoot just that Bigfoot cannot outrun the Elite runner. 2 hours ago, TD-40 said: I conclude that the MD footage was not a hoax. If you are basing this Solely on the incorrect assumption the figure ran faster than the elite runner that is a mistake. Based on other reasons fine. I have not watched the Discovery Channel or whatever on this in years, but I remember the main point. The runner easily ran faster. That is my memory of it anyway. I could have remembered it wrong. Anyone to clarify? Edited 6 hours ago by Backdoc
norseman Posted 1 hour ago Admin Posted 1 hour ago 4 hours ago, Backdoc said: The runner easily ran faster than the 'Bigfoot' in the film. I must be reading this wrong. Are you saying you are under the impression the 'Bigfoot' ran FASTER (?) than the elite sprinter? It didn't. If 'Bigfoot' ran faster than the elite runner there would be little doubt to me this must have been animal and no man in a suit. The runner wasn't even in a suit but running clothes. Now the fact the runner ran faster than the 'Bigfoot' could mean 1) it is a hoaxing man in a suit or 2) It could still be Bigfoot just that Bigfoot cannot outrun the Elite runner. If you are basing this Solely on the incorrect assumption the figure ran faster than the elite runner that is a mistake. Based on other reasons fine. I have not watched the Discovery Channel or whatever on this in years, but I remember the main point. The runner easily ran faster. That is my memory of it anyway. I could have remembered it wrong. Anyone to clarify? The runner was faster in the documentary. Yes. But that doesn’t bother me. The sprinter would have been faster than Patty as well. I do remember the sprinter having problems with the terrain and didn’t do it on one take. And he didn’t do it in a costume either. Not a apples to apples comparison. And the subject in the memorial film DID do it quickly, didn’t fall, and was in full ape man attire. Take that for what you will. Again for me? It’s that peaked head. And Bill Munns talked about how hard it is to replicate a mask that a human head can fit into.
Recommended Posts