The Jacobs Photos

[Chim Chim]

Hey, we’re double clueless, alright. 

[zendog]

22 hours ago, Chim Chim said:

Hey, we’re double clueless, alright. 

The only clueless ones are the ones who fail to see a bear, because its a bear. Every keyboard big game hunter who doesnt see a bear just cant bear it.... lol

[norseman]

50 minutes ago, zendog said:

The only clueless ones are the ones who fail to see a bear, because its a bear. Every keyboard big game hunter who doesnt see a bear just cant bear it.... lol

The only keyboard warrior is you.

[Catmandoo]

On 4/12/2024 at 3:47 PM, zendog said:

To all of you, you clueless clueless simpletons..

 That would be 'clueless²' ?  I am 'cluemoreⁿ  . The Jacobs thingy is not a Sasquatch. It is not identifiable as an animal of Pennsylvania due to the resolution of the camera, but it is a blobsquatch. The image has been butchered over the years and has become a click-bait item for social media. Newbies tend to get excited over blobsquatches.

 

The trail camera in question was a Bushnell Trail Sentry. Maybe 3.2MP resolution. That camera was programed at the factory to take an image at 30 second intervals after a heat-motion target  registered at the PIR. 30 seconds is a long time for an animal to enter / leave a bait pile area without the camera taking an image.

 

I don't guess what animal the Pennsylvania  thingy was, but it was in the blobsquatch category.

[Grubfingers]

14 hours ago, zendog said:

 Every keyboard big game hunter who doesnt see a bear just cant bear it.... lol

The Bear hunter at the end of this video knows it wasn’t a bear. Bear simply can’t bend straight down from the hips and tuck their head like it has.

[zendog]

2 hours ago, Grubfingers said:

The Bear hunter at the end of this video knows it wasn’t a bear. Bear simply can’t bend straight down from the hips and tuck their head like it has.

I will agree the camera resolution on the photo sucks, which is why its silly to stick to one specific aspect, since its blurry crap.

14 hours ago, Catmandoo said:

 That would be 'clueless²' ?  I am 'cluemoreⁿ  . The Jacobs thingy is not a Sasquatch. It is not identifiable as an animal of Pennsylvania due to the resolution of the camera, but it is a blobsquatch. The image has been butchered over the years and has become a click-bait item for social media. Newbies tend to get excited over blobsquatches.

 

The trail camera in question was a Bushnell Trail Sentry. Maybe 3.2MP resolution. That camera was programed at the factory to take an image at 30 second intervals after a heat-motion target  registered at the PIR. 30 seconds is a long time for an animal to enter / leave a bait pile area without the camera taking an image.

 

I don't guess what animal the Pennsylvania  thingy was, but it was in the blobsquatch category.

Blobsquatch? But big game hunters are claiming its a chimp without proof and hiding behind name calling....

[Incorrigible1]

That's one heckuva black kettle.

[Grubfingers]

35 minutes ago, zendog said:

I will agree the camera resolution on the photo sucks, which is why it’s silly to stick to one specific aspect, since its blurry crap.

I wouldn’t call that blurry for a nighttime 2007 Game Camera photo? Any photo gets pixilated when you zoom in to look for pimples.

[Backdoc]

I don't think these photos are anything at all Bigfoot.   I say this so everyone who disagrees can skip over the rest of this.

 

For everyone else...

 

It seems a lot is made of this video when we see- for whatever reason- something weird or odd.   Right off the bat, since a Bigfoot sighting would be a rare event anyway, whatever it might be is very unlikely to be Bigfoot.  There can't be many bigfoot out there should it exist.  The odds of hooking one has to be assumed rare.  If an area had reported recent activity, then I might see it as a slight increase in possibility but still one heck of a long shot.    

 

If we take the challenge to explain what we see on this vid/pic, it doesn't matter if we get it right or wrong if it's NOT bigfoot.   The point of it being a concern to us and esp. those on the BFF is the idea of it being Bigfoot.   If the image ends up being a normal animal (bear) at some odd angle or even some escaped monkey, the point is it will end up being something other than Bigfoot.   If it's not bigfoot it really doesn't even matter what it is.   The entire point is to determine how likely it is to look like bigfoot or suggest it even could be?   Does it walk like a duck and squawk like a duck? 

 

Those who are convinced it is bigfoot can share why there is only one image?

 

Why is it in order to see this as could-be-maybe bigfoot we need to have bigfoot doing Yoga poses or we need this to be some sort of juvenile bigfoot?

 

I just bet if bigfoot would show up at a feeding station any pic taken would look pretty obvious as either bigfoot, some ape like figure suggesting a man in a suit, and so on.  

 

[Grubfingers]

1 hour ago, Backdoc said:

Those who are convinced it is bigfoot can share why there is only one image?

 

Why is it in order to see this as could-be-maybe bigfoot we need to have bigfoot doing Yoga poses or we need this to be some sort of juvenile bigfoot?

 

I just bet if bigfoot would show up at a feeding station any pic taken would look pretty obvious as either bigfoot, some ape like figure suggesting a man in a suit, and so on.  

 

There were two images and it was tiny. There are no other clear images of a youngster.

 

[zendog]

2 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said:

That's one heckuva black kettle.

Says the steering guy whose contribution is trolling.

[norseman]

2 hours ago, Backdoc said:

I don't think these photos are anything at all Bigfoot.   I say this so everyone who disagrees can skip over the rest of this.

 

For everyone else...

 

It seems a lot is made of this video when we see- for whatever reason- something weird or odd.   Right off the bat, since a Bigfoot sighting would be a rare event anyway, whatever it might be is very unlikely to be Bigfoot.  There can't be many bigfoot out there should it exist.  The odds of hooking one has to be assumed rare.  If an area had reported recent activity, then I might see it as a slight increase in possibility but still one heck of a long shot.    

 

If we take the challenge to explain what we see on this vid/pic, it doesn't matter if we get it right or wrong if it's NOT bigfoot.   The point of it being a concern to us and esp. those on the BFF is the idea of it being Bigfoot.   If the image ends up being a normal animal (bear) at some odd angle or even some escaped monkey, the point is it will end up being something other than Bigfoot.   If it's not bigfoot it really doesn't even matter what it is.   The entire point is to determine how likely it is to look like bigfoot or suggest it even could be?   Does it walk like a duck and squawk like a duck? 

 

Those who are convinced it is bigfoot can share why there is only one image?

 

Why is it in order to see this as could-be-maybe bigfoot we need to have bigfoot doing Yoga poses or we need this to be some sort of juvenile bigfoot?

 

I just bet if bigfoot would show up at a feeding station any pic taken would look pretty obvious as either bigfoot, some ape like figure suggesting a man in a suit, and so on.  

 

There are not one but TWO images.

[7.62]

I'm not a bigfoot expert because I have never seen one . I have seen plenty of black bears because my state is loaded with them and get them crossing my property

many many times every year . I know some say it could be a black bear with mange and it's true mange can make animals look really weird  sometimes .

 

I'm on the fence because in my opinion the two photos do not look like a cub with mange .It's just impossible to tell really what type of animal it is.

The length of the limbs just look way too  long to be a black bear . Escaped exotic  animal from a owner ? maybe a chimp ...who knows

[zendog]

5 hours ago, norseman said:

There are not one but TWO images.

All the more for you to bear.

[Doug]

3 hours ago, 7.62 said:

I'm not a bigfoot expert because I have never seen one . I have seen plenty of black bears because my state is loaded with them and get them crossing my property

many many times every year . I know some say it could be a black bear with mange and it's true mange can make animals look really weird  sometimes .

 

I'm on the fence because in my opinion the two photos do not look like a cub with mange .It's just impossible to tell really what type of animal it is.

The length of the limbs just look way too  long to be a black bear . Escaped exotic  animal from a owner ? maybe a chimp ...who knows

I am open for it to be one of the three options. Bigfoot being the least of them, however, I am not willing to definitively say it is one or the others.