Jump to content
Guest

Jacobs Juvenile Revisited

Recommended Posts

Guest mdhunter

When these first came out, I liked them. But I'm pretty far into the bear camp now (all the way). The feet pretty well did it for me. I do understand why people find it compelling though.

Being fairly familiar with watching several species nurse,image 3 looks very much like a nursing position to me.

Don't get me wrong, I would love for it to be a BF, I just don't see it anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The Jacobs creature was most definitely a bear, and only the widest-eyed of wishful thinkers can try to make it anything else.

There is another aspect of this that needs to be laid to rest, however, and it concerns folks who correctly identify the subject as a bear but offer various contortions of its anatomy that ultimately detract from their position. The bear is most definitely not facing the camera in image 3 (http://www.bfro.net/...ure_image_2.asp). The image perceived as a bear's face is pareidolia, and if you really look at representations of the "face" you'll see that its "eyes" are set far too wide for a black bear, the "muzzle" doesn't match a bear, etc. If anything, it looks like some kind of stuffed animal cat face. More troubling, however, is the fanciful and tortured limb anatomy that would be necessary to result in the image displaying a bear looking back toward the camera.

Image 3 depicts a bear doubled over, perhaps rubbing its head and neck on the ground. The limb visible on the left side of the subject is the bear's left front leg. You can even see the lighter area of the "arm pit" on the other image. The two limbs of the right side of the subject are the bear's hind legs.

Note the two "bumps" of lighter color above the legs on the right side of the image. Those are the posterior processes of the ishium that your hip doctor might call the "ishial tuberosity." You can see them quite well on the attached image of a black bear skeleton (I added the blue arrows).

But there's something even more obviously ursine - and completely un-hominine - in the Jacobs creature: the tiny (I'd say non-existent) heel. You can clearly see in the photos that this animal lacks any kind of a pronounced heel. There is no way this organism makes footprints with the big, wide heels we see in bigfoot photos. Adolescent humans have heels just like adults - it's not like we grow our huge Achilles' tendons in adulthood. The bear in the Jacobs photos clearly lacks this. (Protestations of "you can't see the feet in the grass" are preposterous - that's a big eastern hemlock the bear is standing near, and there's little to no herbaceous growth beneath that tree other than the hay-scented fern in the foreground. The paws are quite visible.)

Have fun y'all, and please don't blame me for this thread!

post-212-0-64894300-1349447946_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dopelyrics

VioletX, yes she does like a dog still! The point is, as far as I am concerned, the animal in the pictures still looks like a bear. A hairless one. It has the posture of one. It has the paws of one, too.

Like I say, it is all subjective. We know that some pictures of bears can look like a Sasquatch sitting on the ground using its left arm for support. There's a big thread on it.

Thanks.

Lee

Edited by dopelyrics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Folks, this is one of the most polarizing and frustrating topics I've ever encountered on the BFF. As far as some of us go, we see nothing but a bear for reasons obvious to us, the other group sees a juvinile squatch with almost feverish conviction. I know for a fact that neither viewpoint has anything to do with belief in the existance of bigfoot as I've seen suggested by someone earlier in this thread. I know there is no kind of contrived "evidence" that will ever sway me from the "bear" camp. To my view, despite any

"measurements" that have been done, it's just a bear. I'd wager that some of my pals on the forum, like Forbig for instance, would like to slap me silly for being so set in my opinion. Well, slap away brothers and sisters, it's still a bear! :victory:

How long are we gonna' beat this poor dead horse?

All the above is said with my "Admin" hat off, now hat back on, I look at every new thread on this subject and wonder why start another one. We've several threads from the past which discuss it at length, why keep starting new ones to say the same old thing?

Oh well, as long as we all agree to disagree and promise to play nice I won't merge this thread with the older ones but any further "Jacobs Photo" threads in the future will become a part of this one.

Ok, let the beating continue.

Plus one to Saskeptic for the excelent post above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Good points Saskeptic. I thought they looked good until I saw the first pictures of bears with mange and some of the weird positions bears can get into and those pretty much put the nail in the coffin for me.

Edited by AlbertaSasquatch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest VioletX

Saskeptic, the lack of heel is something I have found troubling as I do the lack of ears and snout,lol!

It must be a Bearman than, only possible solution ; O }

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mdhunter

Saskeptic, In the photo 3 that you have linked (so we are looking at the same pic) What do you perceive the "blob" between the legs to be?

To me it looks a little big proportionally to be this bears head.

Other than that I agree with everything in your post. Very good post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dopelyrics

mdhunter - sorry to jump in.

The blob isn't part of the bear as far as I'm concerned.. The bear's head can't be seen as it's oriented towards the tree.

Unles it is the bear's head and it is upside down facing towards the camera as it scratches its head!

Best.

lee

Edited by dopelyrics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mdhunter

^ That is exactly what I'm thinking. If that were the case I think we would be able to see some upside down facial features.

Nothin' to be sorry about.

As a side note, this bear is standing in almost the perfect position to slide an arrow up through the vitals from the back of the rib cage to the front of the opposite shoulder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest baboonpete

Folks, this is one of the most polarizing and frustrating topics I've ever encountered on the BFF. As far as some of us go, we see nothing but a bear for reasons obvious to us, the other group sees a juvinile squatch with almost feverish conviction. I know for a fact that neither viewpoint has anything to do with belief in the existance of bigfoot as I've seen suggested by someone earlier in this thread. I know there is no kind of contrived "evidence" that will ever sway me from the "bear" camp. To my view, despite any

"measurements" that have been done, it's just a bear. I'd wager that some of my pals on the forum, like Forbig for instance, would like to slap me silly for being so set in my opinion. Well, slap away brothers and sisters, it's still a bear! :victory:

How long are we gonna' beat this poor dead horse?

All the above is said with my "Admin" hat off, now hat back on, I look at every new thread on this subject and wonder why start another one. We've several threads from the past which discuss it at length, why keep starting new ones to say the same old thing?

Oh well, as long as we all agree to disagree and promise to play nice I won't merge this thread with the older ones but any further "Jacobs Photo" threads in the future will become a part of this one.

Ok, let the beating continue.

Plus one to Saskeptic for the excelent post above.

best admin post ever. poor horsey...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

It's very difficult to make out the exact position of the bear's head with much confidence. Some have postulated that we're seeing another object on which the bear is rubbing, others think it's part of the bear itself. Here's what I think I see, so please take this with a grain of salt:

The bear is leaning over in such a way that the back of its neck is actually making contact with the ground. The top of its head is visible to us with its muzzle directed back toward the tree.

If such a pose sounds like an impossible bit of contortionism for a bear, see the big, red, curvy arrow in the skeleton illustration included in my last post. It stresses the great flexibility in a bear's neck and indicates a range of motion just like we're seeing in the Jacobs bear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mdhunter

^I used the grain of salt. haha.

To me, this is the hardest part of the pic to make out. So I just filled it in with "cubs butt" from watching other animals nurse in this same position. I'm not very familiar with ursine. Do they have preorbital glands? My experience with bears is just watching them some on Skyline Drive and around Shenandoah. I'm sure you suspect where I'm going with the gland question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

To my knowledge bears lack preorbital glands. Also to my knowledge, mange itches. I would not assume an animal suffering as the one in the photos would behave just like we might expect a healthy bear to behave. I might, however, expect it to contort itself in unusual ways to scratch odd spots on its body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I totally agree with you everything you are saying, Saskeptic. I respect that the photos are inconclusive, but probability is so high that the Jacob photos are a bear that I don't understand why people cling so hard to them being a Sasquatch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mdhunter

Sas, I was just thinking if they do have preorbital glands it could be marking. I agree an animal with mange would likely "contort" to relieve itches. My only experience with mange is foxes. It sure looked uncomfortable from my observation of them.

I also agree that with the split opinions on these photos, for myself I can respectfully agree to disagree. I can only say what I see, and that is just opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...