7.62 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 1 hour ago, doctorscream said: Todd's video of a Bigfoot traversing a hillside, using a perfectly manlike stride, has been debunked because a right pant leg bottom is visible when the still frames are studied. This evidence not only impeaches that video, but his entire documentary. I tried finding a link to that , do you have it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NatFoot Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 15 hours ago, 7.62 said: I tried finding a link to that , do you have it? I have not seen that analysis either. Would love to see the video breakdown! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stinky Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 I saw this '"documentary" when it first came out a few weeks back. Can anyone explain why both Meldrum and Dr. B are in bed with this guy ????? By coincidence in the three headshots they are all close-ups but not one body shot.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zman1967 Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 I am surprised this guy is still around in the BF world. He reminds me of a snake oil salesman from the 1900's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arvedis Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 He will keep trying to make his point for as long as he is alive. In this case we has able to secure funding from a hack film producer. This is what happens when people become obsessed and don't have real world job skills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaveMan Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 Todd gets a bad rap, everything he doesn't isn't a hoax. Nobody spends that much time and money on hoaxing. For what? Infamy? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arvedis Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 2 hours ago, CaveMan said: Todd gets a bad rap, everything he doesn't isn't a hoax. Nobody spends that much time and money on hoaxing. For what? Infamy? He may have had valid experiences with BF but the problem is capturing actual evidence to prove anything. In the absence of valid evidence people become obsessed and then desperate. In Todd's case he is very desperate and more than a little obsessed. The pattern is to get into hoaxing to try and recreate a facsimile of what a person believed they witnessed. It's an imperfect area of study. Though in a documentary wrap-up I would expect more than a loon dressed in camouflage acting out a sequence of what they claim to have done and witnessed. Either you can demonstrate how you obtained evidence or you can't. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctorscream Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 In Bigfoot Tony's video analysis, he correctly identifies the subjects stride, steps, and movement as human like. In his slow motion, the subjects feet cannot be eliminated as being simply boots covered with a suit, since the bottoms are black, have a significant depth over the front of the foot, and there is no obvious mid tarsal flexibility or tow flexibility. Patty's foot soles in the P-G film were white and had considerable flexibility in the toes that were viewable. Kathy Strain's sighting claimed a super human speed as several Bigfoot climbed a steep hill. There is nothing super human about the speed of the subject as Bigfoot Tony points out. Furthermore, the subject slows to a complete walk, after climbing the several steps up the slope, because he appears to weigh the recovery from his exhaustion as more important than the preservation of his life from two potential gun toting humans at can't miss range of about 15 yards. There are two people at the camera as one unwinded person talks over the top of Todd's huffing and puffing. Why was that person unwinded, when Todd was quite winded? It would appear that the director in Todd saw it appropriate to prepare himself for the cameraman role by doing some pushups, prior to filming the short sequence. All considered, a human cannot be ruled out as the subject on the ledge. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 On 1/9/2018 at 11:26 PM, PBeaton said: BC witness, Thanks ! When I was lookin' for images, I seen I wasn't alone in thinkin' of the sasquatch from Henriksen movie from a few years back, so I put this together. Here's that make up/costume... Who knew Bigfoot was bald? Has every thing we thought we knew been a lie? Is this guy lying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted January 23, 2018 Admin Share Posted January 23, 2018 On 1/19/2018 at 10:31 PM, Rockape said: Who knew Bigfoot was bald? Has every thing we thought we knew been a lie? Is this guy lying? Its Gramps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airdale Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) Watching the figure of the "ridge runner" in Bigfoot Tony's breakdown, the movements as he scrambled up the hill reminded me a great deal of Todd's movements in the opening scenes of the documentary where he is running across the stream demonstrating his commando-fu. Tony also mentions how tight fitting the suit seems to be, and it reminded me of a piece I read a couple of years ago on the "ape-men" seen in the opening segment of Stanley Kubrick's "2001, A Space Odyssey". The actors portraying the ape-men were actually professional mimes. Before filming they spent time studying film of real apes at the London Zoo. Of particular note is the fact that they were not wearing suits per-se, as the movie was released in 1968 and the kind of hair cloth that would flex around the body didn't exist at that time. The hair was actually applied to the mime's bodies. That was the year in which "Planet of the Apes" (the original starring Charlton Heston, and best IMHO) won the Oscar for best makeup. Someone involved in the makeup for "2001" is reputed to have said that the judges must not have realized the apes in their movie were actors. Edited January 23, 2018 by Airdale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NatFoot Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Interesting! Thanks for that info, Airdale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Bigfoot believer Todd Standing takes his case to the courthouse https://alberta.ctvnews.ca/mobile/bigfoot-believer-todd-standing-takes-his-case-to-the-courthouse-1.3777525 Former Albertan Todd Standing has been conducting expeditions and research that document and chronicle the mysterious creature Bigfoot for more than a decade. He has shot, what he says are, crystal clear videos of sasquatch and is using that to petition both the supreme courts of California and British Columbia to recognize Bigfoot as a wildlife species. With his documentary "Discovering Bigfoot" now airing in 26 different countries on Netflix, Todd hopes that taking his evidence to a higher field will then force government agencies to take his research and Bigfoot seriously. Todd also offers a limited number of expedition packages at a cost of $4,800 U.S. per person, where hand-picked participants join him for seven days at an undisclosed research site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Anyone know what the penalty is for hoaxing a supreme court? Just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NatFoot Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Wouldn't think there would be any. You present your evidence either way in any type of case and they rule in favor, or not. Right? I guess if someone could prove (not possible) that he lied under oath there could be a penalty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts