Guest tracker Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Hummmm, notice the line along the back just like Patty's that everyone says is a zipper. Amazing, now we know where Patterson got the pattern for his costume, NOT!!! Yea darker thicker hair along the vertabrae is just a zipper in the early 1900's. And a time consuming, custom made expensive BF suit. When people didn't know their body size proportions other than large and hairy made by some average joe hunters. Sure why not . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Seriously though, do we know this isn't someone in the early 1900's that didn't kill a gorilla in Africa? It's hard to say without background info on the photo. I don't think the gorilla was officially discovered until the 1920's but I'm sure someone somewhere shot one before then and could have possibly gotten a picture of it. It's too blurry to tell what kind of vegetation is behind the guy standing next to the kill to tell whether that's a deciduous tree or a type found in the tropics. As big as that limb is close to the ground, it looks like a live oak, but I'm guessing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Sure maybe but you never know? gorilla? kinda tall for a silverback. I do favor the older pics before photo editing, less hoaxing. In this day and age we can't let ourselves believe anything because of the current editing tech. So sure maybe its a fake? But we need to see some evidence ocassionally that at least will make you go hmmm maybe? And so we continue to search and stay interested. I support the pic from what I can make out of it, it appears to be genuine. I don't trust todays numerous blobsquatches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ajciani Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 I wish we did know the background on that photo. I have seen it posted in many places, but never any citation. I have heard that it is actually a modern fake, rather than a legit old photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 (edited) I wish we did know the background on that photo. I have seen it posted in many places, but never any citation. I have heard that it is actually a modern fake, rather than a legit old photo. Sure it could be fake for all i know about editing software. I don't worry about what others say. I know there's others that like it but won't speak up. What I like is the proportions of the body, how the hair is thicker in some places, the arms still have muscle tension. The guy is dressed in early 1900's? clothing etc. So if it's a hoax or a cut and paste job it's very good. They even took a pic of the back side of the creature so maybe not offend anyone? If they were worried about a zipper line they wouldn't of done that. Otherwise how could they do that without it looking like a gorrilla suit or animation ? Edited February 8, 2011 by tracker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Greldek Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Capture is way to involved and requires way too much money, planning, and organization, and all of that then involves you get exceptionally lucky in having the bigfoot fall into your trap. Killing requires having a gun & being lucky in seeing one, getting the shot off. So kill is the way to go, and is also IMO way less cruel to the animal than imprisonment. At least when it's dead, it doesn't feel anything. So how do I kill one? Shoot it with my rifle. That's my big elaborate plan. Of course I will try and get a good shot off, headshot / hear lungs etc. No point in shooting it in the arm and then just crippling it. Also just an FYI, anything that can be done with film, can be reproduced exactly digitally. The limiting factors are the skills of the human behind the digital media, and the software they are using. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagniAesir Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 I had heard that the photo was a fake. The person standing was standing well back of the hanging animal, giving it the appearance of large size. I will see if I can find the information I had Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagniAesir Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 I tried to edit my last post but the site wouldn't reload for awhile. I was mistaken the place I saw the photo was debating whether the photo was fake or not. Neither side could give any history on the photo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ajciani Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 OK, I found that the photo first appeared on Cryptomundo on Nov. 21, 2006. Original Cryptomundo Article It was supposedly sent in by a reader. The image shows significant and rather obvious digital artifacts. Looks like it was composited and air brushed, poorly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 OK, I found that the photo first appeared on Cryptomundo on Nov. 21, 2006. Original Cryptomundo Article It was supposedly sent in by a reader. The image shows significant and rather obvious digital artifacts. Looks like it was composited and air brushed, poorly. yea i can see some blurry or defective spots? But still how did they create the entire creature with airbrushing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagniAesir Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 yea i can see some blurry or defective spots? But still how did they create the entire creature with airbrushing? goto youtube and search photoshop, lots f examples of what is easily done to photos in mere minutes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 First off this is not the thread for pro kill or anti kill. This is for discussion on how any of us would go about trying to capture or if needed to kill a very fast, powerfull and intelligent creature. A creature that has superior senses and physical abilities than ours? For scientific identification of course, then the debate is over. Capture. 1. Okay so maybe you would just hold it long enough to obtain the required proof (48 hours?) then set it free. How would this be achieved? They could bend steel bars I bet, so besides risking killing one in a box car, How from start to finish? Kill. 2. Okay now here the other side, how would a hunter kill one and get it back in one piece for identification. One shot won't bring one down. You would need to track it and finish the job miles deep into the mountains. Maybe even at night with it or others screaming at you or worse? How? Tree stand and baiting only works for less intelligent creatures. Tree knocking, call blasting and trail cams are almost successful. Anyways we got enough blobsquatches already with trying to film them. We need to go for the gold or go big or go home etc,etc. Whats your plan? Do we have to answer within the parameters you set up (...creature that has superior senses and physical abilities than ours. ...Tree stand and baiting only works for less intelligent creatures), or should we respond if we have a different idea of this animal? Either way, one shot can certainly bring this thing down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 ...Why attack the Sasquatch when you benefit from it? ... You might ask the scorpion, or the frog, if either could answer. If it's the wolf's nature to eat meat and bigfoot is meat would a wolf rationally make a decision that it might in the future benefit from the bigfoot? I think the wolf would eat the meat it can, not make plans to eat something else in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 Do we have to answer within the parameters you set up (...creature that has superior senses and physical abilities than ours. ...Tree stand and baiting only works for less intelligent creatures), or should we respond if we have a different idea of this animal? Either way, one shot can certainly bring this thing down. It's open, just trying to get the ball rolling. Sure a powerful shot to a vital area. But first things first . How would you locate and lure them closer to do that? Because I don't believe the conventional methods we employ now will ever work. Other than obtaining another blobsquatch or sound recording. I am not pro kill but if you had to bag one how would you do it? Personal I believe an unknown will be the first to bag one, not any researcher or hunter. Probably some person living rural that had a trust built up then decides to sell them out $. They seem to move in groups and collect and hide their dead. So don't hold your breath for a road or train kill. JMO tracker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Inquisitor Jake Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 (edited) If anything I think aircraft would be the key to capturing/killing bigfoot. A helicopter with a good transport capacity and a thermal imager, I believe would help alot. Spot the object using the Thermal then dropping the "troops" onto the target or having a aerial sniper take the shot and kill/sedate the bigfoot. I also dont think biggie can outrun a good chopper pilot. Only thing he can do is possibly go in a cave and the only thing limiting the search would be weather and fuel and of course supplies for the people doin the search. just my 2 cents. -Inquisitor Jake Edited February 9, 2011 by Inquisitor Jake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts