Guest Dudlow Posted July 14, 2011 Posted July 14, 2011 But how do you explain the line of seperation that's visible in some of the best copies? Don't tell me... let me guess... it's... a... zipper! - Dudlow
Guest Forbig Posted July 14, 2011 Posted July 14, 2011 Nice comparison. I lean more towards primate than bear but I think the main issue is due to the Occams Razor Theory. The bear cubs were in the same time frame or close in time proximity ( If I remember correctly). I've had the same issue myself with a series of pics that my cam captured back in 09. The primate people that I sent the pics to says "primate" but due to my bird being in the same series of pics the bigfoot people say "bird" lmao!!!!!!!!!!!! The 2 sasquatch pictures were taken seconds apart but the bear cubs were 27 minutes earlier. IMO That sounds like they had plenty of time to be long gone. If you don't think that's a long time try holding your breath for 27 minutes.
Painthorse Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 The 2 sasquatch pictures were taken seconds apart but the bear cubs were 27 minutes earlier. IMO That sounds like they had plenty of time to be long gone. If you don't think that's a long time try holding your breath for 27 minutes. Dude, don't get hissy, in all honesty 27 minutes is not a long time for animals to come and go.........but that's really not the main issue, JMO. There are other animals within the time frame. MY POINT.............Just because there are other animals (bears) in the vicinity DOES NOT mean IT CAN'T be a primate in that pic. I have many, many pics on the cams with several different species of animals WITHIN minutes of each other. It is possible to have different species during the same time frame whether it's minutes, hours or days. Is that clearer?
Guest themanta Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 I thought I'd start a new twist on the subject since they usually start with "it's a bear" or "put a nail in the coffin" or something on that order. This way we can compare the two side by side. Nope it IS a bear, and thinking it's a primate amongst in the middle of PA is silly. What you're doing is coming off like some kind of cult desperate to believe.
Guest themanta Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 It has yet to be proven "anything". Its a less than perfect night time picture of a bear by a trail being portrayed by others as something else by those either with an agenda or desperate to believe anything. I say agenda because most think of this whole subject as old news, those that dont are kinda sad.
Guest Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 Nope it IS a bear, and thinking it's a primate amongst in the middle of PA is silly. What you're doing is coming off like some kind of cult desperate to believe. Hmmm... if I may- you are laying it on a bit too thick here. It's too obvious that you really want a confrontation, so nobody is going to give it to you. Pull it back some, leave some room for some back and forth, and you might get some action. Hope that helps!
Guest RayG Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 Where are the photos taken immediately before and after the two photos being bandied about? How come we never get to see those pics? Surely if the camera is capable of taking pictures 36 seconds apart, then more pictures likely exist, right? Surely they would add some meat to the claim that we're looking at a primate, right? Instead we are shown two shots of bears, one at 20:02:55, the other at 20:04:23, and then two shots of supposed bigfoot at 20:32:05 and 20:32:41. Where are some of the pics from 20:30:00 - 20:35:00, and what do they show? Why are only those shots that might be interpreted as a bigfoot shown from that very small time-frame, and the remainder conveniently withheld? RayG
Guest Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 Hey uh if you look at it this way: then maybe look at the third one here: http://www.bfro.net/avevid/jacobs/jacobs_photos.asp IDK, I showed a bro of mine that knows wildlife, and he immediately saw a bear looking at the camera, please tell me someone else has also seen this in the jacobs photo!!
BobbyO Posted July 15, 2011 SSR Team Posted July 15, 2011 Hey uh if you look at it this way: then maybe look at the third one here: http://www.bfro.net/avevid/jacobs/jacobs_photos.asp IDK, I showed a bro of mine that knows wildlife, and he immediately saw a bear looking at the camera, please tell me someone else has also seen this in the jacobs photo!! I can see that yeah but if it were to be the case i'd say the Bear had a deformed front right Paw & there's just something about the Limb/Leg measurement that really don't look right, if it were a Bear in the position we're talking about..
Guest rockinkt Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 Where are the photos taken immediately before and after the two photos being bandied about? How come we never get to see those pics? Surely if the camera is capable of taking pictures 36 seconds apart, then more pictures likely exist, right? Surely they would add some meat to the claim that we're looking at a primate, right? Instead we are shown two shots of bears, one at 20:02:55, the other at 20:04:23, and then two shots of supposed bigfoot at 20:32:05 and 20:32:41. Where are some of the pics from 20:30:00 - 20:35:00, and what do they show? Why are only those shots that might be interpreted as a bigfoot shown from that very small time-frame, and the remainder conveniently withheld? RayG Quit asking tough questions that no-one wants to address!
bipedalist Posted July 15, 2011 BFF Patron Posted July 15, 2011 Where are the photos taken immediately before and after the two photos being bandied about? How come we never get to see those pics? Surely if the camera is capable of taking pictures 36 seconds apart, then more pictures likely exist, right? Surely they would add some meat to the claim that we're looking at a primate, right? Instead we are shown two shots of bears, one at 20:02:55, the other at 20:04:23, and then two shots of supposed bigfoot at 20:32:05 and 20:32:41. Where are some of the pics from 20:30:00 - 20:35:00, and what do they show? Why are only those shots that might be interpreted as a bigfoot shown from that very small time-frame, and the remainder conveniently withheld? RayG Yah, if this were such a hot development, first thing to come out would've been the .gifs made from all those wonderful "other" pictures.
Painthorse Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 Yah, if this were such a hot development, first thing to come out would've been the .gifs made from all those wonderful "other" pictures. Question? Do we know for sure that there were other pics? I don't remember if it was said if Jacobs had the cam set to take multiple pics. I know with my Stealth I can set it to take from 1 to 9 pics in a sequence with roughly a 5 second lag once the cam gets triggered, then the cam goes into "sleep mode" for 60 seconds before it resets. The Bushnel I have only takes 1 pic at a time, can't do multiple sequences with it, BUT I can set the sleep mode for longer durations between being triggered. Does anyone know what settings Jacobs had the cam set on? It's probably in some of the other threads here but it's too darn early to read through all that mess in the other threads, lol. Just a thought to others that set out the cams that have the video option, USE IT! JMO, even though it eats up the battery life quicker when using that function, we wouldn't be having these debates on pics. I'm spending more money on batteries using the video option but it will eliminate the questionable stuff.
Recommended Posts