Guest Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Like the old chimp photo I still think I can get in that position better than a bear could I guess I'm just camera shy. Physically impossible. Prove me wrong or this comparison is null and void! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Forbig Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Physically impossible. Prove me wrong or this comparison is null and void! What do you know about the flexibility of a juvenile that the rest of us don’t? Can a human do the same things as a juvenile? The line of separation means the leg has to be coming down from the other side that makes your null and void, null and void. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 What do you know about the flexibility of a juvenile that the rest of us don’t? Can a human do the same things as a juvenile? The line of separation means the leg has to be coming down from the other side that makes your null and void, null and void. I know the flexibility of a juvenile cannot defy the law of physics. This is about perspective, not flexibility. I also don't see a "line" and even if there was a line there, how do you know what it means? Sorry, unless you can prove it's even possible you've got jack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tsalagi Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 It looks to me like a chimpanzee. When I was a kid there was this guy in town had a large chimp which I used to sit and watch a lot. The pic looks like the way a chimp moves and the proportions seem right. That said I have seen some scrawny, mangy young black bears who look like that. When bears are skinny they do look and move weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crosspeg Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 I know the flexibility of a juvenile cannot defy the law of physics. This is about perspective, not flexibility. I also don't see a "line" and even if there was a line there, how do you know what it means? Sorry, unless you can prove it's even possible you've got jack. I know you don’t admit it but I see some separation from the body it’s not a continuous leg going up to the hip. I’ll agree what he’s done seems a little awkward but not nearly as awkward as what he’s done in the other photo when he turns himself into a stump. I also agree it’s not proof but it’s not impossible nor does it defy physics. Nobody could prove what’s physically possible for a Sasquatch. As we watch him transform into the ape in this video he’s positioned almost exactly like the ape with the exception of a slight twist and a spine will twist. If anything both photos demonstrate that Sasquatch have a great sense of balance and it might explain how they’ve been able to hide from us this long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Good question....uuhhh....why would a juvenile Bigfoot do the same? Maybe because it is in their nature, just like chimps have been known to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slabdog Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 I love it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LAL Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 I wasn't aware sasquatches have the same proportions as chimps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knuck Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Ain't it da truth! -Knuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slabdog Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Motion and perspective captured on film (still or video) can have strange visual effects.... Remember the Gable film? A now-admitted hoax...but prior to that revelation it appeared as if the figure was a bear...turning into a bull...turning into a dog man... All this debate is moot. Let's just hope the DNA comes through because we will never solve anything like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crosspeg Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 (edited) I wasn't aware sasquatches have the same proportions as chimps. You're not alone according to Dr. Meldrum nobody knows how a Sasquatch develops. I do know human proportions change as we mature and these photos may be the first gauge we have to compare to. Edited July 19, 2011 by Crosspeg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LAL Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 (edited) Let's just hope the DNA comes through because we will never solve anything like this. True that, but then we'll probably have to shut down the forum because there won't be much left to argue about discuss. Thanks for the link, Crosspeg. Very interesting. All wild animals should wear clearly visible ID tags so we won't get confused. ETA: Dr. Meldrum's final conclusion was that it was a bear. From the BFRO site: "Below posted with permission from RobDay. On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:11 PM, wrote: Hello Dr. Meldrum- My name is Robert Day, of Los Angeles, California. I am writing to you for verification of a quote that was recently attributed to you. Please forgive me for taking up your time on this issue, but it has apparently stirred up some debate and there is a lot of heresay being tossed around. It would be greatly appreciated if you could help, but I also understand that this subject is "touchy", and I will certainly respect any desire you have to comment/not comment on the topic. The quote in question came from the 2007 Texas Bigfoot Symposium. The subject matter at the time was "the Jacob's Photos". According to one claimant, you were quoted as saying that the animal in the Jacob's photos was "most likely a Black Bear". I don't want to seem biased in any way. Any information you can give me will be greatly appreciated, but a simple "yes or no" as to the validity of this quote will be more than helpful. If you can elaborate further it would mean a great deal, but again, I understand the nature of this subject and do not wish to take up your time with something that is speculative at best. Thank you very much for your time, Robert Day ----------------------------------- Very little speculation involved... the image is almost certainly a black bear, yet the photos continue to receive unwarranted attention. Jeff Meldrum -- Jeff Meldrum, PhD Dept. of Biological Sciences Idaho State University 921 S. 8th Ave., Stop 8007 Pocatello, ID 83209-8007" Edited July 19, 2011 by LAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crosspeg Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 True that, but then we'll probably have to shut down the forum because there won't be much left to argue about discuss. Thanks for the link, Crosspeg. Very interesting. All wild animals should wear clearly visible ID tags so we won't get confused. ETA: Dr. Meldrum's final conclusion was that it was a bear. From the BFRO site: "Almost certain" and "most likely" that's far from a final conclusion. Most everyone is "almost certain" that Bigfoot "most likely" don't exist. Let's not forget those trick photos somebody had on here the other day that Dr. Meldrum was shown before he said this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crosspeg Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 With Sasquatch being in the area both before and after these photos were taken I honestly don’t see how anyone that believes Sasquatch is real would question these photos. The evidence that stands behind them screams juvenile Sasquatch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts