Jump to content

The Munns Report (3)


Recommended Posts

Guest Bigfoothunter

^^

 

Did you learn anything from what Munns posted or are you more interested in steering the conversation towards a nut like Carter Coy? And answer with the idea in mind that it may be seen in the questionable character thread.   :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Crowlogic

^^

 

Did you learn anything from what Munns posted or are you more interested in steering the conversation towards a nut like Carter Coy? And answer with the idea in mind that it may be seen in the questionable character thread.   :)

I am interested in pointing out similarities in the appearance of the thing in the video and how it compares to known  and or obvious fake.  Now if you see that as steering  a conversation or being nefarious then you are grasping at straws that go way beyond my pay grade to comment on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

^^

 

So you didn't learn anything fromwhat Munns said? Instead you think you can look at videos and tell which has real fur or artifical fur. Hope you are better at that comparing wood carvings to foot prints. I personally suspect that you'll not fare as well for Roger's film isn't good enough to see details in the fur. But if that is all you have got, then go for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crowologic seems to be the local 'expert' on everything bigfootish these days. We should all bow in reverence and listen to him. He's come to teach us stuff doncha know?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
Squatchy McSquatch

Martin: if you have VLC Media Player you can watch the stabilized PGF and adjust the speed.

 

You can also play around with the video settings (contrast, brightness, etc.)

 

Youtube also allows you to slow video down half speed, quarter speed...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill.

 

If you were given the actual in -camera film to examine, and the original in-camera film showed evidence of a costume, showed evidence of splicing, showed the actual date of processing to be different than the PG timeline, or had additional scenes which would make hoaxing of the film obvious, would you tell us?

 

Thanks,

Link to post
Share on other sites

^ for some reason it seems to be a natural progression for many footers to edge paranormal after a period of time.

I don't know why but I suspect it is because once the initial bf belief sets in it is hard to reverse course. Like traveling thru a canyon... After looking for proof for some extended period of time and only finding stick structures, ambiguous one off tracks, wood knocks or hearing howls in the distance the researcher becomes frustrated. Bigfoot is so close but yet so far away...... one way out of the canyon is to reverse course and reconsider your overall belief. The other is to head to the other end of the canyon which means paranormal squatch because that easily explains why nothing has been discovered and provides cover for being correct from the start.

Edited by Martin
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
×
×
  • Create New...