Jump to content
Cryptic Megafauna

Almasty Russian Wild Man Video

Recommended Posts

Maxtag

That's the image that came up when I Google "clown hunts bigfoot"

It's a good one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeafTalker

Great video, CM! I saw it again recently, on a good monitor, and it's really impressive.

No human is that big, has shoulders like that, and moves that fast.

Thanks for the post!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fanofsquatch

This video has been discussed here before. I can't find it though.

Because bigfoot deactivated the search function. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

Leaftalker, honest question here, has there ever been a piece of alleged bigfoot evidence presented here that you have not endorsed as genuine?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeafTalker

It's kind of hard to view your question as honest, because you're suggesting that the possibility that I have never NOT "endorsed" some video (or piece of evidence) as "genuine" implies I must be a fool. Because, you know, nothing is 100%. So I must be a fool, huh?

 

But even though your question is not honest, I will answer it anyway.  

 

I do, in fact, think most videos are the genuine article. (I will talk about videos here, because the subject of this thread is -- surprise -- a video.)

 
Lots of people like to assert that one video or another has been hoaxed, but these are empty assertions. There are no facts backing them up. To my knowledge, nobody has ever offered "proof" that any video was hoaxed. Ever.
 
So the people who cry "hoax" are only voicing opinions. And usually, these opinions are held by people who have never seen a BF and believe that the hairy people don't exist. 
 
I'm a knower. So why would I be interested in an "unknower's" opinion that a video is a hoax? Not only do they have no evidence for such a conclusion, but they have no experience to draw on to support their contentions.    
 
The only opinions that carry weight with me are the opinions of people who have had sightings. 
 
And every video that has ever been made public has elicited from some knower or group of knowers the information that the subject in the video resembles what they've seen. 
 
In the absence of any "hard evidence" one way or another as to the "authenticity" of a video, the opinion of a knower, again, is infinitely more valuable than the opinion of someone who has never seen a BF and does not believe they exist. 
 
How anybody could argue this is beyond me. 
 
In addition, I have trained my eye well enough at this point that I can much more easily and readily tell what's going on in a given video than I used to be able to. And having looked at many, many videos and revisited many of them many times, many doubts I might once have had (because I believed the clamor of the uninformed) are now gone. I know now to trust my eye, and not the clamor of the uninformed. 
 
Most videos are controversial. Why is that? Because the people who have seen BF recognize a resemblance to what they've seen in person, and the people who have never seen a BF recognize nothing, and the two factions (for obvious reasons) can never come to any resolution on this.  
 
A video that is an actual hoax is not controversial. You will never hear anybody argue about the authenticity of Butchy Kid videos. Anyone with even a single functioning eyeball can tell immediately that the subject of those videos is not a BF. 
 
This is not the case for most videos. Most videos seem to stimulate much argument and discussion. This is because there is a very, very, very strong likelihood that the subject in the video is an actual BF. 
 
So if you decide that a particular "controversial" video is very likely authentic, you are very likely to be correct.  

 

Hope this helps answer your honest (?) question. 

Edited by LeafTalker
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

With all do respect   your answer  exemplifies  what dmaker said. . You lost me on most videos are the genuine article.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  All videos are  most likely of the hoax variety.  With the one possible exception . The Patterson film. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
salubrious
Moderator

I'm of the opinion that there are a few others as well that are not fake; perhaps a thread on what those might be?

 

Only thing is, every single one of them will have some doubters no matter how real they are, just as Leaftalker points out. The problem we are dealing with is that humans have a lot in common with BF, and you have to look really closely to see what the difference is between a human in a suit and the actual real thing. Why humans love to hoax BF is another matter altogether.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
georgerm

Good point Sal.

 

Seems like hoaxers keep our community sharp. If we get fooled, the public will come down on us like a 'ton of bricks'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

IF we get fooled? No bigfoot video has ever been confirmed as legit. Ever. In fact, the evidence now points to bigfoot is likely a social construct and not a flesh and blood animal. That would, obviously, mean that every bigfoot video is fake. You talk about IF you get fooled, you've been fooled by every single, bingle, dingle, zingle one of them that you thought was real. Every one. 

 

Where is this ton of bricks you speak of?

Edited by dmaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shelly

I look at this stuff with an open mind but Ive never seen or heard of bigfoot prancing around and flapping his arms like Peter Pan.  There isn't any known physioligical reason to run like this.  People don't.  I'd think with those antics he would be making some sort of noise too.  And, no one seems overly concerned or interested, not even the dog. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeafTalker

BF move in lots of different ways. They walk and run on two feet, and they walk and run on all fours. They climb trees and swing around in them. They have been observed moving rapidly down out of trees head first. They can crawl on their bellies faster than you can run on your two feet. They have been reported to jump insane distances from a standstill. And primates have been observed to move in exactly the manner shown here. Apparently, for them, there are plenty of physiological reasons to move that way. 

 

I think you would need to translate the words being spoken on the film before you could begin to evaluate properly how the observers felt about what they were observing. Also, the kid was with his dad, and as some viewer of this video has pointed out, may have felt safer than he would have otherwise. Also, the BF was not moving toward them, so they didn't necessarily feel under threat. (But again, it would be interesting to read a translation of what they were actually saying.)

 

And the behavior of the dog is not relevant unless you know the dog. 

 
Not all dogs respond the same way to possible provocation. In addition, if you want to talk "typical" dog behavior, a "typical" response would be to rush at the individual, ESPECIALLY if it were a mere human.
 
The fact that this one did NOT do that is extremely interesting.
 
Most dogs seem to know that attacking a BF is beyond their pay grade, and would NOT approach a BF. 
 
Also, if these people live near the area where they're walking, it could be that the dog is already acquainted with the BF and is not alarmed by his or her presence. BF are very often reported to have relationships with domestic dogs, especially dogs that are kept outside in pens or fenced areas. 
 
Not sure about this video being "rehearsed". If they had the budget necessary to produce this -- a budget that allowed them to hire the biggest human in the world who is also the most accomplished gymnast in the world, and a budget that allowed them to have a suit constructed for the biggest human in the world, and constructed specially to offer him complete freedom to do his fantastic movements -- they would have had enough money to hire someone to keep the dog out of the shot.  
 
This video is very likely of a real BF. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shelly

Yeah but the apes that do tend to walk that way, like gibbons (or are they a monkey) do it because they have to. You dont see a gibbon walking with his arms down by his side swinging front to back as in the PGF.

 

Also, aren't these Russian guys supposed to be more human/Neanderthal like and less ape/sasquatch like? 

 

Ultimately this is one of those inconclusive videos.  Good enough that it has to be a bigfoot or a hoaxer, but bad enough that you cant say for certain.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeafTalker

Yeah but the apes that do tend to walk that way, like gibbons (or are they a monkey) do it because they have to. You dont see a gibbon walking with his arms down by his side swinging front to back as in the PGF.

 

-- It seems you're saying that swinging your arms front to back as you walk is a better way of moving than any other way. That doesn't seem right, to me. If you can move in multiple ways, there's probably a reason for that. Different modes of locomotion presumably suit different purposes. Maybe sometimes it's good to walk with your arms swinging back to front, and sometimes it's not. Lucky BF, that they have more options than the rest of us.  

 

Also, aren't these Russian guys supposed to be more human/Neanderthal like and less ape/sasquatch like? 

 

-- Good question. I have no idea. 

 

Ultimately this is one of those inconclusive videos.  Good enough that it has to be a bigfoot or a hoaxer, but bad enough that you cant say for certain.  

 

-- I think many people would agree with you. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OntarioSquatch

With all do respect   your answer  exemplifies  what dmaker said. . You lost me on most videos are the genuine article.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  All videos are  most likely of the hoax variety.  With the one possible exception . The Patterson film. 

 

MXaLbQk.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeafTalker

With all do respect   your answer  exemplifies  what dmaker said. . You lost me on most videos are the genuine article.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  All videos are  most likely of the hoax variety.  With the one possible exception . The Patterson film. 

 

To my knowledge, there is not a single shred of evidence anywhere that any video has ever been hoaxed. Unless you were present at the filming of a particular video, or know someone who was present at the filming of that video, or have in your possession some irrefutable piece of evidence as to the authenticity of that video, you cannot know anything about that video's authenticity, much less the authenticity of any group of videos.

 

You are not in a position, therefore, to know what is or is not "further from the truth" with respect to the authenticity of any particular video or group of videos.

Edited by LeafTalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×