Guest Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Obvious fake! It's probably not a mask, but photoshopped. Obvious fake? What if it's real? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted September 2, 2011 SSR Team Share Posted September 2, 2011 No photos? Videos? Patty? Here's the new Sylvanic pic, looks a lot like Patty... Anything? What Photo's & Video's, there doesn't appear to be any apart from Patty ?? These two for me, by a million miles.. I have a problem with the source of that Picture you posted, i don't particular have a problem with the Picture, but the source if suspect, to be polite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest believer Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 I would love to talk to the folks who owned the land and took the video. Have they ever been interviewed anywhere? Probably falls under the nda. Them explaining how they got the video would help. Especially time of year, behavior. Maybe that's in the book Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted September 2, 2011 SSR Team Share Posted September 2, 2011 I would love to talk to the folks who owned the land and took the video. Have they ever been interviewed anywhere? Probably falls under the nda. Them explaining how they got the video would help. Especially time of year, behavior. Maybe that's in the book Land owned by Adrian Erickson, Videographers employed by Adrian Erickson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Land owned by Adrian Erickson, Videographers employed by Adrian Erickson. I just got your PM, sorry I didn't see it until now! Anyway, it is my understanding that much of the video was shot by the previous land-owners, and Erickson bought the land specifically because of the regular sasquatch activity on it. I'm not sure that these videographers were employed by Erickson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted September 2, 2011 SSR Team Share Posted September 2, 2011 I just got your PM, sorry I didn't see it until now! Anyway, it is my understanding that much of the video was shot by the previous land-owners, and Erickson bought the land specifically because of the regular sasquatch activity on it. I'm not sure that these videographers were employed by Erickson. I believe the Videographer for this had the initial DP & is/was emplyed by AE Jon.. & even if thta isn't the case for this particular piece of Footage, there are large portions of the rest of the Footage obtained, that was.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) My understanding is the frame grab of the Sas in the fetal position under a tree was from a piece of video shot by the original land owners. Erickson's team supposedly has more HD footage of this Sas and others. BTW - the Standing shot is not photoshopped. It's a frame grab from a piece of video. There is footage that does show slight movement. The head turns just a tad. Is it real? I'm 90/10. Ninety percent towards an actor in a costume. Edited September 2, 2011 by rwridley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Russell Brand? That's obviously an actor in a suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 My understanding is the frame grab of the Sas in the fetal position under a tree was from a piece of video shot by the original land owners. Erickson's team supposedly has more HD footage of this Sas and others. BTW - the Standing shot is not photoshopped. It's a frame grab from a piece of video. There is footage that does show slight movement. The head turns just a tad. Is it real? I'm 90/10. Ninety percent towards an actor in a costume. No, I think that was another video. But anyway, they're both fakes IMO. The head just doesn't fit in. The shadows and the lens blur doesn't seem right. It's interesing how different this face looks from the other one in the previous video. My theory: Standing realized that he couldn't fool people with masks, so he created a newer version on the computer, probably using bigfoot and early hominid illustrations, and pasted it into the film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 I believe the Videographer for this had the initial DP & is/was emplyed by AE Jon.. & even if thta isn't the case for this particular piece of Footage, there are large portions of the rest of the Footage obtained, that was.. This piece of footage and many others were not filmed by "DP", just to set the record straight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thepattywagon Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 This is all I can think of when I see that pic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 That picture is so wrong on so many levels... I will say no more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 This cannot be understated. For a man to go through all of that just to perpetrate a hoax, he would be certifiable. (bolding mine) Is that so unlikely? According to these data, 2.8% of the U.S. adult population suffers from "severe mental illness." Assuming 200,000,000 adults from our population of just over 300,000,000, that's 5.6 million people who are severely mentally ill. The number with more mild illnesses and various personality disorders would be quite a bit more than that. These folks estimate 17.4 million Americans suffering from bipolar disorder, for example. So there are many millions of people in the U.S. suffering every day from mental illnesses that could lead them to behave erratically as perceived by folks without such problems. For multiple reasons, it would be inappropriate for me to suggest that Erickson or anyone else is "certifiable." That explanation is, however, an entirely valid hypothesis to explore if one is to assess the "Erickson Project" objectively. There is vastly more and better evidence that mental illnesses afflict people, i.e., millions of people are in fact certifiable, than there is that a population of undescribed giant, hairy hominids is running around in the woods right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 THAT was worth a plus one from me. Very well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 This is all I can think of when I see that pic. So they have one in captivity? Amazing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts