Rockape Posted June 14, 2015 Posted June 14, 2015 OK I was wrong. I apologize Crow. Good on you. Way to man up. Not many of us do that and I include myself.
Guest Crowlogic Posted June 14, 2015 Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) OK I was wrong. I apologize Crow. Did not realize the profile picture showed more than the avatar. It was just freaky that Crow posted a picture that I no longer have. I got it from your profile page. I've already stated it to you. If a member goes to your profile the fuller photo is available. I even used the bigger photo so that the entire overlay would be evident as to what it's being overlay on. Sorry I can't make it any clearer than that. But why not have a look at the photos and see if one is derivative of the other. When the brush photo was posted at least one other poster wanted to know if there was an uncropped version. I've got nothing to hide what say you? My concern was that perhaps your avatar had formed the base of a dubious photo. Edited June 14, 2015 by Crowlogic
SWWASAS Posted June 14, 2015 BFF Patron Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) Like I said, I apologize! I noticed that you did clarify it but it was not until I checked my profile that I saw the uncropped profile picture you used was the basis for your comparison. Thanks to Rockape for saving me from more self imposed embarrassment. One could however say that if the wood carving has any resemblance to BF (and honestly I don't know if it does) that any authentic BF picture would resemble it. Beerhunter can address his own picture. Quite franky rather than use my picture and my profile source you probably should have given me credit by name. You just said a members avatar. Minor point but should the picture have been copyrighted using it without credit would have been a copyright violation. It was not, so no problem there. This whole fiasco on my part, mostly, just shows the dangers of posting pictures. Anyone can grab them and use them for any purpose. That is why some I have I have held back. Copyrighting is a messy government form process that I have done before and in reality, in most cases it is not worth the effort to go after someone. You have to go to court and get a judgment so whatever it is has to be worth the legal fees. Edited June 14, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT
ThePhaige Posted June 14, 2015 Posted June 14, 2015 Many bigfooters and others have had their computers hacked and files taken, so it is not an unreasonable concern. It is because it happens that can be the cause of the concerns and oversensitivity to it. I recall Autumn Williams had some evidenciciary photos taken and claimed that when it happened that it nearly derailed the publishing of the book "Enoch" as she had put some weight on those photos substatiating the claims made within the bool. That is just one example. I could site many... and yes as someone made the statement as to there being conveniently positioned players within the discussion to shepard the direction of the topic, those are known to also be in place. SWW its ok to be wrong about something it does in no way minimize the excellent and valued contributions you do make and/or diminish the things you are right about... we are all both hypocrates and knowers , that is the human condition.
ThePhaige Posted June 14, 2015 Posted June 14, 2015 ^^ It seems memory failed me in relation to the way the breach of evidence occured within the Autumn Williams, It was actually Mike (the subject in the book) who had the pics taken and assumed Autumn had something to do with it. I was recalling another conversation I had with someone and mixed the two up...just wanting to clarify as it really doesnt change my point. Thanks to the person who PMed me to correct me and I will withold the name of this person as it was a PM.
dlaw Posted June 14, 2015 Posted June 14, 2015 I think Mike said someone at work stole the photos, if my memory is correct.
SWWASAS Posted June 14, 2015 BFF Patron Posted June 14, 2015 Many bigfooters and others have had their computers hacked and files taken, so it is not an unreasonable concern. It is because it happens that can be the cause of the concerns and oversensitivity to it. I recall Autumn Williams had some evidenciciary photos taken and claimed that when it happened that it nearly derailed the publishing of the book "Enoch" as she had put some weight on those photos substatiating the claims made within the bool. That is just one example. I could site many... and yes as someone made the statement as to there being conveniently positioned players within the discussion to shepard the direction of the topic, those are known to also be in place. SWW its ok to be wrong about something it does in no way minimize the excellent and valued contributions you do make and/or diminish the things you are right about... we are all both hypocrates and knowers , that is the human condition. When I recovered use of my computer Dell said it appeared to have been hacked. That was what got me concerned that a picture I know I had taken was being used when I thought the only thing left of it was what I see next to my postings. I did not realize the profile has a less cropped version that avator available until it was pointed out to me. My larger concern was I have pictures I have not made public. The thought of those getting out before I am ready to release them is very concerning to me. Thom Powell has actually had a break-in and the only thing they seemed interested in was his collection of BF evidence. Some other forum member also said privately they have had a picture or pictures they took that someone else had claimed as their own. You can be sure that anyone who gets anything good will have a fight on their hands unless they take measures to safeguard the picture. While the digital media is fine in most ways, lack of an original negative or film is problematic if you need to prove who took it. . At my age I don't really mind being wrong now and then since that is part of the process of science to put forth theories which are either validated by others or disproven. I just hate being wrong and looking paranoid at the same time with an issue like this.
ThePhaige Posted June 14, 2015 Posted June 14, 2015 Goes with the territory... I confess I had em in my home as well. I came home one day and all my pictures were strewn out on the floor and certain ones set aside to send a messege, as well as a giant gift in the toilet that had things not smelling real fresh as I walked in... but thats another story for another time perhaps.
Sunflower Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 My picture is a juvenile peeking at me over some sword ferns. Mom nearly ran over me and was carrying the juvenile and whooping back and forth with another BF as it approached. Mom went into a crouch with a huge thud when she either saw or smelled me. Bindernagel summed it up by saying he wished the picture showed more of the little guy. Similar comment from Meldrum. I cannot disagree with that, I wish it showed more too. One of those pictures Crow would declare not good enough. But since it is a juvenile it is even more rare. He has somewhat of a sagittal crest showing that is emphasized by Mohawk like hair that is sticking straight up on top of the head. There are parts of his nose and face that are very pink. I think as they age their faces probably get darker as they tan. I agree with the pink colored skin theory and also the hair sticking up like a Mohawk. A friend's pic shows that same characteristics that you have seen. Their eye sockets seem to recede as well the older they get.
Squatchy McSquatch Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 So no best evidence. Just more jumping on Crow.
southernyahoo Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 Until somebody brings one in this will suffice as the outcome of the evidence. There are a number of definitions of proof. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/proof noun 1.evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in itstruth. 2. anything serving as such evidence:What proof do you have? 3. the act of testing or making trial of anything; test; trial:to put a thing to the proof. 4.the establishment of the truth of anything; demonstration. 5. Law. (in judicial proceedings) evidence having probative weight. 6.the effect of evidence in convincing the mind. 7.an arithmetical operation serving to check the correctness of a calculation. It is possible for people to be under the influence of #6 without a specimen. They often arrive there by using methods which would fall in #3.
Guest DWA Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 I'm still trying to get my arms around the arrogance of denying thousands of people their experience, particularly when the evidence totally backs them. If you haven't seen one, your opinion doesn't matter. If you haven't bothered to get up to speed, ditto. If you are distracted by every bright shiny Internet bauble, and can't do the work because, well, that's work, ditto. Your opinion doesn't matter. Most particularly to any individual who has the sternest proof our species accepts: the evidence of his own two eyes.
Bonehead74 Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 If you haven't seen one, your opinion doesn't matter. Have you seen one, DWA?
Guest Crowlogic Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 (edited) I'm still trying to get my arms around the arrogance of denying thousands of people their experience, particularly when the evidence totally backs them. If you haven't seen one, your opinion doesn't matter. If you haven't bothered to get up to speed, ditto. If you are distracted by every bright shiny Internet bauble, and can't do the work because, well, that's work, ditto. Your opinion doesn't matter. Most particularly to any individual who has the sternest proof our species accepts: the evidence of his own two eyes. It's not arrogance. It's arrogant to think that anyone disagreeing with you is not up to speed. Sure let's cut everything on the internet off because it's nonsense. Well OK goodbye because you're on the internet right here and pontificate on the subject left and right. You talk about your Dr Bindernagle well without the internet how much would you know about him? Sorry friend nobody would know much about anything without the internet. If not for the internet with you know to be part of the group you're with? Can you even name anything of consequence that's happened in bigfoot culture that would have any traction at all these days without the internet? Your group relies on the (you guessed it) internet!. I posted this thread knowing there would be nothing posted back but a lot of insight has been gained. Yes a photo (poor and dubious) was posted and yours truly made the effort to cross check the image because it didn't sit well with. So what happened. All hedes breaks loose because a member goes off half cocked. That member is a researcher too and researchers are supposed to look at the evidence, graphic and lyric. So here is the quality of observational skills we're dealing with? All's well that ends well but not a single observation is stated as to the possibility of the photo in question possibly being not as it was posted as. Indeed maybe folks like myself stop believing in bigfoot because they can see through maze. That said any time you want to post something rock solid go right ahead, the forum exists more for you than it does for me and I'm sure you'll be helping advance your cause by doing so. Edited June 15, 2015 by Crowlogic
Recommended Posts