Jump to content
SackScratch

Trail Cam Bigfoot Pics

Recommended Posts

SackScratch
On 5/20/2020 at 1:55 PM, Airdale said:

The first photo on this page is the same as the one from page 3 but reversed. It appears to be a gorilla from the glutes up with most of the legs a human with fur/hair photo shopped on. It's clear if you zoom in on the bottom of the legs just above the water surface; the fur transitions to trouser legs with a straight hem. A fold in the trouser fabric thinly camouflaged with fur is clearly visible on the left calf.

 

I was gonna mention that, on another forum when I posted that pic noone said it was a real Gorilla, they said it was a man in a suit and some said it was a photoshopped hoax.

11 hours ago, gigantor said:

 

^^^ Those are artistic representations, there is no way to know how they actually looked (skin / hair).

 

 

 

it comes out in the DNA, the physical characteristics, thousands of articles on it like this one: 

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/07/first-modern-britons-dark-black-skin-cheddar-man-dna-analysis-reveals 

 

Although if that particular specimen doesn't have the DNA extraction complete yet then they have to speculate what they looked like.  In forensic DNA in criminal cases when only bones are found of the victim it's stunning how close they get to the actual appearance of the person with physical reconstruction... only going on the bones and DNA extraction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SackScratch
On 5/19/2020 at 11:42 AM, Holyfield said:

 

CCE0226F-35DE-45AF-B74F-25274987EC06.jpeg

 

I could have sworn that that pic was on the dvd cover to one of the "Bigfoot Lives" DVD's I bought on eBay but I can't find it, I have containers full of Bigfoot DVD's...  I found this one though...

 

81c6kTWKHtL._SL1500_(1).jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlackRockBigfoot
On 5/9/2020 at 7:44 AM, wiiawiwb said:

Hiflier, I'm convinced you're on to something with the e-DNA.  The problem with people like us that go out in the field is we have no idea how to extract evidence, where to send it, and what it will cost.

 

The latter two are critical. If it costs $3,000, I'm not about to send anything out unless I am unfailingly convinced I've got the goods.  My concern is that we'd get the classic "contaminated" letter in the mail and now we're out a fair amount of money. The way I look at it, for my purposes alone, the $3,000 (just an example) would be better spent getting better equipment. I've got a good thermal imager. Maybe I can spend the $3,000 on a drone and add a killer camera setup.

 

If the e-DNA could be done at a relatively inexpensive price and done so anonymously, so I don't find men in black standing at my door one day, I'd be all over it.  I applaud the work you're doing on this because this path will be the best hope we have. I just don't want to burn through cash in the process because the only person I'm proving things to is me. I don't want sasquatch to be proven to the outside world.

Exactly.

 

We have found hair before that didn't seem to match up with anything else known to be in the area.  It sits in a ziplock back on a shelf. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlackRockBigfoot
18 hours ago, SackScratch said:

 

I was gonna mention that, on another forum when I posted that pic noone said it was a real Gorilla, they said it was a man in a suit and some said it was a photoshopped hoax.

 

it comes out in the DNA, the physical characteristics, thousands of articles on it like this one: 

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/07/first-modern-britons-dark-black-skin-cheddar-man-dna-analysis-reveals 

 

Although if that particular specimen doesn't have the DNA extraction complete yet then they have to speculate what they looked like.  In forensic DNA in criminal cases when only bones are found of the victim it's stunning how close they get to the actual appearance of the person with physical reconstruction... only going on the bones and DNA extraction.

Forensic recreations are accurate because they are trying to recreate a species that is currently walking around today.  They have living breathing examples to study and to use to extrapolate how the decedent may have looked. 

 

Using the same techniques on creatures that we have never seen alive is as much art as it is science.  The end result is probably more anthropomorphized than 100% accurate...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SackScratch

all the mutations that make various humans look the way they do is well known in the DNA now and is explained in various Cold Case CSI Documentaries, News programs and Investigative TV shows that deal with real Cold Case Files... example: a hunter or hiker finds a human bone in the forest and the FBI has DNA extracted which gives them clear data on race, hair color and they build a sketch which often gets recognized by family members to solve who the person is... it's way better and accurate if they recover the skull... Humans bred with untold numbers of these sub-species in the past so people making it seem like they're so removed from these others species is just not accurate.  Like I said, when I was a kid the Neanderthals were taught in school to be basically cave dwelling ApeMen then they find Neanderthal DNA in moderns Humans so now they lump the Neanderthals in the Human Family Tree category... same with Denisovans and soon many African sub-species will be thrown in over the coming decades from new DNA findings if they've not done so already... I'm sure the Indonesian Hobbit will be thrown in soon enough also... basically anything that walks on 2 legs and doesn't have feathers is Human now in the fossil record with the exception of penguins of course!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SackScratch

This is one Nasty Squatch: 

 

IMG_20200522_184545.jpg

 

this I found while googling: 

 

IMG_20200522_184453.jpg

 

did this photo case end up just being a cardboard cutout?  Did the photographer admit to Hoaxing it??

IMG_20200522_184114.jpg

IMG_20200522_184206.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SackScratch

thanks to DNA and new skeletons found all over the place the story of Evolution, Genetic Mutations, and Natural Selection of how Humans ended up what they are today gets more complicated every year... IMO Humans are a Heinz 57 Sauce of bunches of Humanoids, Sub-Humans or whatever you want to call them... like for Neanderthals the Homo Erectus when into Asia and Europe and probably hunted and bred the Neanderthals and Denisovans into Extinction while absorbing some of their Genetic Mutations through breeding with them along with Exterminating most of the large animals in the process of which the Neanderthals had coexisted with all those large creatures for hundreds of thousands of years prior...

IMG_20200522_183642.jpg

IMG_20200522_183744.jpg

all those things in the pics walked on 2 legs also and existed longer than modern Humans have so far... according to a documentary I purchased on dvd the "Cradle of Humanity" in South Africa creatures they found walked on 2 legs, made stone tools and had brains smaller than a Chimps brain and they lived about 3 million years ago!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
21 hours ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

We have found hair before that didn't seem to match up with anything else known to be in the area.  It sits in a ziplock back on a shelf. 

 

Plastic bags will degrade the sample. Better to keep it in a plain paper bag to maintain it's integrity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Exactly.

 

We have found hair before that didn't seem to match up with anything else known to be in the area.  It sits in a ziplock back on a shelf. 

Ziplock bag may not be a good choice.       The best way to preserve DNA is to let it dry out quickly so bacteria does not grow in the sample and destroy the DNA.    If the sample is already dry you might get lucky with a ziplock but hair is hydroscopic and will adsorb moisture from the environment.    If placed in plastic it likely cannot dry out in storage quickly enough to prevent bacteria from destroying the same.    A simple paper envelope would be a preferred method for storage of a hair in a dry state.   Filter paper is mentioned also.    Coffee filter would likely do.       Here is a link that discusses DNA storage.   http://www.genetictechnologies.com/collection-and-storage-dna-evidence/

Edited by SWWASAS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeZimmer
Posted (edited)

I thought this was from a video of the creature climbing a fence. The video I am thinking of was very interesting.

 

 

IMG_20200522_184206.jpg

Edited by MikeZimmer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SackScratch
52 minutes ago, MikeZimmer said:

I thought this was from a video of the creature climbing a fence. The video I am thinking of was very interesting.

 

 

IMG_20200522_184206.jpg

 

post that video if you have a link to it, I saw somewhere while googling around the Snow Squatch pics above and a video of the photographer talking about his photos... below that on this website or message board (can't remember which) was a paragraph or two Debunking the photos as a cardboard cutout Hoax but I never saw anything more about it, I'm sure I have it in my thousands of favorites saved in my phone and will run across it again eventually... all I did was save the pics, watch the video, read the De-Bunkers story and moved along to keep stimulating my A.D.D. !!! lol 

 

I was just wondering if anyone else had saw anything new on it and if the photographer had admitted to Hoaxing it or was sticking to his story...  they were posted as 2 photographs not from a video but the video posted with it was the photographer saying he saw the Bigfoot and snapped cellphone pics of it!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeZimmer
16 hours ago, SackScratch said:

 

post that video if you have a link to it

This is the video I was thinking of. I have not looked at this carefully enough to see it matches the picture you posted.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor

^^^  He made a mistake doing the math  :lol:

 

When I plug in the numbers, my calculator says:

 

55.31 / 48.87 = 1.131  

 

He's saying 1.31. Then he uses 1.31 to make his next calculation, the body proportions of the subject...  which of course is wrong.

 

Always check the math!

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SackScratch
4 hours ago, MikeZimmer said:

This is the video I was thinking of. I have not looked at this carefully enough to see it matches the picture you posted.

 

 

 

No that video has nothing to do with the 2 pics I posted, I seen that video many times on my "Bigfoot Lives" DVD's!!  There's 3 Bigfoot Lives DVD's put out by Tom Biscardi where they go to various places to investigate Bigfoot, SkunkApe and similar creatures... often investigating videos including the one you posted and Bigfoot photos also... one of the problems I have with the DVD's is how often they find Bigfoot prints in perfect condition in so many places while "Finding Bigfoot" TV show found a couple crappy prints in 100 episodes they did!  Bare in mind "Finding Bigfoot" mostly went to Bigfoot Hotspots according to BFRO reporting data and those people that packed in for their town meetings were people that'd filed Bigfoot Sightings Reports with the BFRO!!  and they score a couple crappy prints in 100 episodes??  While Biscardi's Rag-Tag Team of Stooges could score dozens of perfect Bigfoot prints at just one stop in Texas!?! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeZimmer
3 hours ago, gigantor said:

^^^  He made a mistake doing the math  :lol:

 

When I plug in the numbers, my calculator says:

 

55.31 / 48.87 = 1.131  

 

He's saying 1.31. Then he uses 1.31 to make his next calculation, the body proportions of the subject...  which of course is wrong.

 

Always check the math!

 

 

 

 

Does it change his essential conclusion much? I have not looked at the numbers.

1 hour ago, SackScratch said:

 

No that video has nothing to do with the 2 pics I posted, I seen that video many times on my "Bigfoot Lives" DVD's!!  There's 3 Bigfoot Lives DVD's put out by Tom Biscardi where they go to various places to investigate Bigfoot, SkunkApe and similar creatures... often investigating videos including the one you posted and Bigfoot photos also... one of the problems I have with the DVD's is how often they find Bigfoot prints in perfect condition in so many places while "Finding Bigfoot" TV show found a couple crappy prints in 100 episodes they did!  Bare in mind "Finding Bigfoot" mostly went to Bigfoot Hotspots according to BFRO reporting data and those people that packed in for their town meetings were people that'd filed Bigfoot Sightings Reports with the BFRO!!  and they score a couple crappy prints in 100 episodes??  While Biscardi's Rag-Tag Team of Stooges could score dozens of perfect Bigfoot prints at just one stop in Texas!?! 

 

Seems to be a lack of integrity, as opposed to simple mistakes. I also see a lot of wishful thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...