Todd Standing Hoaxing? Is Blinky Todd Standing? - New Pics/dna Results

[Drew 497]

I have an excellent collaboration with Jeff and he and I have not discussed his other lines of investigation, so I simply trust that Jeff is responsible in what else he investigates and whom he also collaborates with, and I consider that in any situation, there may be things going on behind the scene or not readily disclosed which would change the whole context of the situation.

 

So frankly, I'm steering a wide course around this topic and will let it take its course, see where it goes. I won't judge it with only partial knowledge of the situation.

 

Bill

 

Right- I was just looking for your opinion on the mask/head eye movement only.  I understand your collaboration with Dr. Meldrum and was simply looking for an opinion from someone who has done Animatronics before.

[Bigtex 239]

Has TS ever given the type(s) of cameras used, lens, and distance? Nothing to hide there, and could explain a lot.

[Doc Holliday 1,491]

Nothing Standing has presented looks living. It is funny how he can get such a close, high resolution facial pic, and still unabIe to prove anything.  I just can't believe that Dr. Meldrum is teaming up with this guy.

this ^, plus 1 wvf.

 

TS rep precedes him.

while i commend bill for taking the high road on this discussion,  the meldrum association with standing is interesting to say the least.... i can't see the good Dr. gaining any credibilty from this blinking situation.

[Guest]

@Sweaty Yeti: that is a great high-res version. Where did you get it? Also, FWIW, great job on the hair. The mouth is not the correct proportion tho. According to countless sightings, their mouths on unusually wide.

[SweatyYeti 2,113]

^

 

The website that I got it from is linked-to at the bottom of my post.

 

One 'red flag' I see with that image, is how the subject's face became completely unobstructed by any branches...and yet still shows no movement, whatsoever....(except for that mechanical-looking eye blink).

[Bigtex 239]

IMO.......BF's won't look alike unless they are twins, so features will vary. Still on the fence with Standing, and I haven't done enough research on the subject to make a call, it's either real or a very good puppet(s) obviously, but If fake and with so much care/detail involved, I would expect there to be a puppeteer lurking around, unknown & hidden to all except Standing.

 

There is obviously a hair gene that can switch on or off quickly, without the process of evolution, and has been seen throughout human history.

 

If I was gonna hoax a Bigfoot, why not get one of these guys to help you? I've often thought how cool it would be to know one of these individuals with the gene turned 'ON', and get them involved in some field studies. What would a Bigfoot think, they would surely be very curious.

[salubrious 918]

the "Squatch" remains frozen...

 

 

Normally you're supposed to not repost images and here I am doing it. But I am doing it for a reason. Take a look at that stick in front of its mouth in both photos. Its the same stick- but in one photo the camera is closer to the stick, so it looks larger. So the prop has been moved to nearly the same position- but not quite, same for the camera. Yet the angle is the same, the distance to the lens seems the same, everything lines up etc. What are the chances of that in real life??

 

IMO this is incontrovertibly fake, make no mistake and no way around it.

[Wheellug 109]

the big picture, fuzzy background etc is more the right.. the small inset picture to the left slightly. 

[Guest]

Welcome to Bigfoot's first photo shoot!

Say "Cheese" Bigfoot! Wait, move a little to the left, now closer......closer

[SweatyYeti 2,113]

In those two frames...notice how the shadow on/below the subject's right eye changes.

 

It seems strange to me, how the shading on it's face could change to that extent...while the subject's head, and face appear to change so little. 

Edited April 8, 2014 by SweatyYeti

[salubrious 918]

Not shot at the same time of day.

[Guest]

More likely one shot in full sun, the other when a cloud was passing overhead.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Interesting.  Easy to make a still life model and then give it some harmless motion somewhere.  At least it looks better than Blevins.

[AaronD 1,206]

IMO.......BF's won't look alike unless they are twins, so features will vary. Still on the fence with Standing, and I haven't done enough research on the subject to make a call, it's either real or a very good puppet(s) obviously, but If fake and with so much care/detail involved, I would expect there to be a puppeteer lurking around, unknown & hidden to all except Standing.

 

There is obviously a hair gene that can switch on or off quickly, without the process of evolution, and has been seen throughout human history.

 

If I was gonna hoax a Bigfoot, why not get one of these guys to help you? I've often thought how cool it would be to know one of these individuals with the gene turned 'ON', and get them involved in some field studies. What would a Bigfoot think, they would surely be very curious.

 

You might put them at risk of danger---I see what a cat does to the newbie in the house

[SweatyYeti 2,113]

Not shot at the same time of day.

 

barncat wrote:

 

More likely one shot in full sun, the other when a cloud was passing overhead.

 

 

I think that salubrious' explanation would be the more likely one, barncat....because a shadow caused by a passing cloud would probably cover most, or all, of the subject's face.

 

The very small shaded-area looks more like it was due to a change in the 'angle of lighting'. 

 

But the problem with that is....how long would a real, live Sasquatch just stand there....(imitating a Squatch-aquin)....while Todd was right in front of it, at close range...moving around, and recording it??? 

 

 

This video of Todd's is nothing but a joke. It's obviously not a video of a real, live Beast in the wild.

Edited April 9, 2014 by SweatyYeti