WV FOOTER Posted August 24, 2013 Posted August 24, 2013 I believe that even with the most crystal clear video/pic., with a totally clear face shot, with facial movement, teeth showing, and even a loud Growl/Howl, there would be those who call FAKE.No, not even a photo that clear will satisfy everyone. It will take a body to do that i'm afraid.
Rockape Posted August 24, 2013 Posted August 24, 2013 If it is blurry, needs red circles etc. it's not worth showing. If it's clear and unambiguous, it will stand on it's own merits. 1
AaronD Posted August 24, 2013 Posted August 24, 2013 With technology like it is nowadays, a crafty 10 y/o could produce a video with the teeth, growls, hi def hair, even sweat on the brow--so no, it wouldn't convince anyone who didn't already want to believe. The winning edge for the PGF is that it came from a time when nothing like that was available, and the more we try to focus it the more we are perplexed; sav for a few who seem to notice a zipper or keys err whatever they think they see.... 1
Guest COGrizzly Posted August 24, 2013 Posted August 24, 2013 ^^ My opinion as well OntarioSquatch. Could be wrong. Have been before.
ThePhaige Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 It isnt going to be these short clips of varying degrees of clarity...mostly poor to unrecognizable. My opinion is it would have to be a series of videos with some very up close observations of them engaged in normal everyday activities over a long period of time...things like, hunting, eating, grooming, and family interactions just to name a few. Probably also some video of human pulling and prodding them to show they aren't in suits. Certainly there would still be some who cry fraud even still. The likelihood of garnering this kind of footage is sadly,highly unlikely though.
Guest Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 I am going to photograph and video my dog, who is black and short furred, a lab beagle mix of all things, in various unstaged settings, among those being thick brambles secondary growth old clear cut, young hardwood ten year old growth, open grass, weeds, and mature pine stands, relatively clear understory and pine straw carpeting. these being what she walks and snoops and plays in around our yard. As a test I will try to obtain the clearest, steadiest images I can. I will use the little digital non expensive Kodak camera I have, and will use a variety of optical and digital magnifications, like anyone would, to try to get the best image of whatever one was photographing. I am not an expert photographer, maybe not even a semi knowledgeable one, but probably similiar to most untrained people who take pictures for fun and memories. I will snap images of my dog moving and stationary, I know this is off topic, I just wonder what quality images chance sighting of any creature of fur might be. I know many people have much better equipment and training than me and I'm sure their efforts would reflect that, Having an open mind on the subject, I would not want to prejudge a photo based entirely on the quality of the image, although blobsquatches are frustratingly frustrating lol But I don't think all blobsquatches are created equal, I think some merit more attention than others backstory and character of the photographer being taken into account. Maybe I can show myself how difficiult or easy it may be to get a usable or non blobsquatch image.
Guest Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 There are thousands of gun toting yahoos who hunt every year. If there were any, one would have been dropped. Because that would be a majortrophy and payday. And you really can't argue and say they avoid hunters and areas being hunted. Because how many sightings have been reported? And you really can't argue and say they avoid hunters and areas being hunted. Because how many sightings have been reported?
roguefooter Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 I should have been more clear. My opinion is that the video doesn't exist and that it's a fabricated claim. Hard to say. HRPuffnstuff has never struck me as anyone who tried to impress anyone or wanted attention. The whole "can't be released' thing is shady and questionable but HR just doesn't strike me as one of those people. 1
AaronD Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 ^^ The "can't be released" was because he respected the position of the one who allowed him to see it. Plain and simple.
Guest Suesquach Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 What ever happened to HRP? I haven't seen him around here lately.
Rockape Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 There are thousands of gun toting yahoos who hunt every year. If there were any, one would have been dropped. Because that would be a majortrophy and payday. And you really can't argue and say they avoid hunters and areas being hunted. Because how many sightings have been reported? All true, and a good point. I have seen hunters who claim a sighting say they weren't sure what they were seeing, or that it looked too human to shoot, or that it wasn't threatening them so they didn't feel the need to shoot, or that they weren't confident their weapon would do anything but **** it off. Still, you'd think someone would have bagged one by now. What ever happened to HRP? I haven't seen him around here lately. HRP has left the building for his own reasons. And I agree with roguefooter, he never seemed the type who worried about what others think or felt the need to impress anyone.
Guest DWA Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 All true, and a good point. I have seen hunters who claim a sighting say they weren't sure what they were seeing, or that it looked too human to shoot, or that it wasn't threatening them so they didn't feel the need to shoot, or that they weren't confident their weapon would do anything but **** it off. Still, you'd think someone would have bagged one by now. Not really. Why? The evidence. The pattern of evidence suggests something with a 100% occurrence rate in the history of science, to wit: everything with this volume and consistency of evidence has been confirmed, except this. And there's no reason to believe that this will be the sole exception. All we know is that no one who has killed one has submitted a body to the scientific community which then certified proof. That's all we know. I'm much more ready to believe that 100 hunters - or not a single one - have shot one and not cared who knew than that thousands of sober eyewitnesses (and that's only the number that have made reports) have made extremely consistent observations of something that doesn't exist. That are backed up - at the very least - by hundreds of footprint finds (and that's only the number that have been reported) that seem to have been made, on the assertion of experts, by that same something.
TD-40 Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 Releasing a fool-proof video would change that person's life forever, in ways they probably don't want.
Rockape Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 All we know is that no one who has killed one has submitted a body to the scientific community which then certified proof. That's all we know. I'm much more ready to believe that 100 hunters - or not a single one - have shot one and not cared who knew than that thousands of sober eyewitnesses (and that's only the number that have made reports) have made extremely consistent observations of something that doesn't exist. That are backed up - at the very least - by hundreds of footprint finds (and that's only the number that have been reported) that seem to have been made, on the assertion of experts, by that same something. I can agree with the bolded and underlined part, but I'm not so sure about the rest. I'd say it's possible that perhaps a handful of hunters over the years have shot and killed one, but were either too concerned that it looked to much like a human that they could be in trouble, or that the area was so remote they couldn't pack the body out and knew no one would believe them. I have seen several stories over the years of hunters killing them, but without a body they are just that, stories.
Guest Posted August 25, 2013 Posted August 25, 2013 With technology like it is nowadays, a crafty 10 y/o could produce a video with the teeth, growls, hi def hair, even sweat on the brow--so no, it wouldn't convince anyone who didn't already want to believe. The winning edge for the PGF is that it came from a time when nothing like that was available, and the more we try to focus it the more we are perplexed; sav for a few who seem to notice a zipper or keys err whatever they think they see.... That's not true, if it was there would be tons of videos like that already. The truth is very few people can create something that would be convincing, and even then there would be tell-tale signs of CGI. A good high quality video would still be very valuable evidence.
Recommended Posts