ShadowBorn Posted February 23, 2019 Moderator Posted February 23, 2019 The next question should be asked is why did they not follow the creature? If they had this creature on a FLIR video you would figure that they would be able to follow it through the woods. I am just saying this since I have a FLIR and if I have one in my lens. I am not going to just stand still and get one video and go away. I am going to follow it and see where it is going to lead me. The reason why it must of been hiding behind trees was it must of thought that it could of have been shot.. So it was jumping from tree to tree in order to evade. Now I am just speculating but what are the chances that I am right. This creature does not look like a creature that it is not being seen by humans. Either the creature knew about the humans in the first place and spied on them and was then spotted or the humans spotted the creature. In this case the creature had no choice but evade on not being seen. But then this brings up another point about how the creature knew it was being video'd and was just trying to escape the camera. Either way this all leads up to the behavior of the creature if this video is not a hoax. Just my opinion
OkieFoot Posted February 23, 2019 Moderator Posted February 23, 2019 (edited) ShadowBorn, Below is from Cliff Barackman's analysis. Going by the last sentence, my guess would be since it was somewhat after midnight and the Brown's had no lights or weapons with them (at least I don't think they had any lights or weapons with them when they started following the noises they heard), after it took the big step, they feared trying to follow the figure any further in the dark with only a thermal imager. At some point in the evening, they heard some knocks, so they walked in that direction. Every time they heard noises, it seemed like it was just a little bit ahead of them, no matter how far they went. Stacy Sr. then saw a heat signature from behind some trees a little ways off into the palmettos. Whatever it was stepped briefly out into the open. What Stacy Sr. saw was a large, man-shaped figure take one long step and disappear into the brush. He turned to his son who had not seen the figure at all and said, “We gotta go.” Edited February 23, 2019 by OkieFoot
Twist Posted February 23, 2019 Posted February 23, 2019 3 hours ago, norseman said: No offense meant. But the video stands until someone can prove that its a hoax. Which I doubt. Just because its possible to add something later doesn't mean anyone did. So many people have scrutinized it, I think something like CGI tampering would be easy to find. With that said its a video...... OK...... WADR, a video of an unknown thing, reported to be an unknown species, ala BF, is not a video that “stands” on any merit. It’s another blob squatch on the pile. Real or fake.
norseman Posted February 23, 2019 Admin Posted February 23, 2019 1 minute ago, Twist said: WADR, a video of an unknown thing, reported to be an unknown species, ala BF, is not a video that “stands” on any merit. It’s another blob squatch on the pile. Real or fake. Thats not correct. Concerning the scientific question on a unknown species? Sure, it has no merit. But if I take a video of a cryptid? And you accuse me of being a hoaxer? I would expect you to present evidence that I was a hoaxer! Otherwise its just slander on your part.
Twist Posted February 23, 2019 Posted February 23, 2019 On the Brown footage there is no clear evidence that there is a cryptid. How does one prove or disprove just "what" is on that video? Its a shadow or blur at best.
JKH Posted February 23, 2019 Posted February 23, 2019 They did recreate it. Estimate is 8.5' tall. Limb proportion is not human. There is plenty of context in that area, etc.
norseman Posted February 23, 2019 Admin Posted February 23, 2019 16 minutes ago, Twist said: On the Brown footage there is no clear evidence that there is a cryptid. How does one prove or disprove just "what" is on that video? Its a shadow or blur at best. You missing the point. Did he tamper with his video to make it looks like a Bigfoot or not? If your going to accuse someone of hoaxing? Then yes you need proof of them being guilty of that.
Twist Posted February 23, 2019 Posted February 23, 2019 I guess we are not discussing the same thing, I was stating that the video itself is nothing more than subjective video. Not if it is a hoax or not. Hoax or not, it may be fun to view and speculate about but it is nothing more than that, entertainment. I have nothing against Brown, but its just not conclusive. I guess our points are apples and oranges.
norseman Posted February 23, 2019 Admin Posted February 23, 2019 34 minutes ago, Twist said: I guess we are not discussing the same thing, I was stating that the video itself is nothing more than subjective video. Not if it is a hoax or not. Hoax or not, it may be fun to view and speculate about but it is nothing more than that, entertainment. I have nothing against Brown, but its just not conclusive. I guess our points are apples and oranges. I was addressing PG's claim that a expert told him that the video was likely tampered with. No video will ever be conclusive.....none.
Huntster Posted February 23, 2019 Posted February 23, 2019 2 hours ago, norseman said: .........No video will ever be conclusive.....none. I'm not so sure of that. Had Patty been an 8' tall male with shoulders significantly wider than hers and 16.5" footprints, I think the deal would have been sealed.
norseman Posted February 23, 2019 Admin Posted February 23, 2019 16 minutes ago, Huntster said: I'm not so sure of that. Had Patty been an 8' tall male with shoulders significantly wider than hers and 16.5" footprints, I think the deal would have been sealed. I dont. I think your 8 ft tall male could have been curling Bob's pack horse fer 20 reps and they would have still proclaimed it a elaborate hoax...... Sorry Im very cynical anymore.
Old Time Lifter Posted February 23, 2019 Posted February 23, 2019 6 hours ago, norseman said: I dont. I think your 8 ft tall male could have been curling Bob's pack horse fer 20 reps and they would have still proclaimed it a elaborate hoax...... Sorry Im very cynical anymore. I want to go down on the record as saying I don't think BF can curl a horse... not only because of the weight but because the horse just wouldn't say still for it. Plus the whole mechanics of the weight distribution is problematic for trying to do curls with something shaped like a horse. LOL j/k with ya.
Huntster Posted February 23, 2019 Posted February 23, 2019 7 hours ago, norseman said: ........Sorry Im very cynical anymore. Buddy, believe me, I understand why that is. And I can hear the deniers now over such a video. But if coupled with two witnesses and good castable prints, it could turn the page.
Patterson-Gimlin Posted February 23, 2019 Author Posted February 23, 2019 When I said my friend told me that the creature was added after the fact. That does not mean it was. I maintain that it is inconclusive and not worth further study. There is only one piece of evidence that makes the subject worth further study. Not 8 foot tall, but in my humble opinion a member of the 7 foot club.
Recommended Posts