Catmandoo Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 10 hours ago, Backdoc said: Those who are convinced it is bigfoot can share why there is only one image? It is not a Sasquatch. Again, the camera had a factory setting of one image every 30 seconds. 30 seconds is a lot time for an animal to enter and leave a bait station. That format can be limiting for ID and locomotion observations. It was cost effective to monitor for deer, bear, turkey or ground hogs. An image does show that the target did not have an elongated Calcaneus at the heel = not a Sasquatch. I have had a lot bear images: walking forwards, walking backwards, doing a spin and turn move to change directions, walking on a log etc. I deleted most of them. It is a blobsquatch to be fodder for social media. At the end of the day, there is an expression that works: " I don't know". 'I don't know' is a good answer. For those of you who want to burn more time, find out if Mr. Jacobs sold his Bushnell camera on ebay and bought a Reconyx brand camera. That time period would probably be an RM45, RC55 or an old Silent Image. Carry on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backdoc Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 10 hours ago, norseman said: There are not one but TWO images. got it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 19 minutes ago, Backdoc said: got it 👍 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grubfingers Posted April 16 Author Share Posted April 16 14 hours ago, Catmandoo said: An image does show that the target did not have an elongated Calcaneus at the heel = not a Sasquatch. I have had a lot bear images: walking forwards, walking backwards, doing a spin and turn move to change directions, walking on a log etc. I deleted most of them. It is a blobsquatch to be fodder for social media. At the end of the day, there is an expression that works: " I don't know". According to the news video “I don’t know” was the term used from the beginning. As for the calcaneus at the heel it definitely has a heel seen on the right foot that’s definitely going deep in fall leaves. To claim anything else would be seeing things not provided by the evidence. Cub photo from earlier standing at the same location missing its foot proved leaves were deep and covering all feet from a complete view. No toes or claws can be seen on anything that was there that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 20 hours ago, zendog said: All the more for you to bear. Hey! Low key! Buh bye!🚽🧻 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 2 hours ago, Grubfingers said: According to the news video “I don’t know” was the term used from the beginning. As for the calcaneus at the heel it definitely has a heel seen on the right foot that’s definitely going deep in fall leaves. To claim anything else would be seeing things not provided by the evidence. Cub photo from earlier standing at the same location missing its foot proved leaves were deep and covering all feet from a complete view. No toes or claws can be seen on anything that was there that day. Well….a Chimp certainly doesn’t have much of a heel. And if they curl their toes I don’t think you could easily discern it from a paw. Unless it’s using its feet as hands. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backdoc Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 On 4/15/2024 at 12:28 PM, norseman said: There are not one but TWO images. I must say I had no idea there were two images. I don't know if my not knowing means I am out of the loop, the TWO images are just that unimpressive, or.... probably both. Probably both. In any event, these images do not impress me. The concept is really sound. I'm thinking the next big home run Patterson Gimlin-like film will come from some kind of security or trail cam over a cell phone quick draw. Thanks for clearing up the two images thing. I may be wrong in my opinion, but I don't want to be wrong in the objective facts surrounding these issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backdoc Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 (edited) Should the Jacobs Photos really be uncommon? There must be a lot of feeding stations out there. There must be a lot of cameras out there. Shouldn't we have a lot more suspected Bigfoot images? Obviously, a camera would need to be in "Bigfoot Country" just like any swamp ape would need a camera in "swamp ape" country. If Bigfoot is hungry and is attracted to the lure/ food in the line-of-sight, it should be a successful pic capture. Why are Bigfoot trail cam/motion cameras or videos in short supply? I still think they are the best chance to get the next PGF-level video but what does it tell us we don't have that yet? Edited April 17 by Backdoc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grubfingers Posted April 17 Author Share Posted April 17 19 minutes ago, Backdoc said: Shouldn't we have a lot more suspected Bigfoot images? Absolutely there’s no animal on earth that is immune from being captured on a game camera. Not even the smartest like these Apes or man himself. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 2 hours ago, Backdoc said: Should the Jacobs Photos really be uncommon? There must be a lot of feeding stations out there. There must be a lot of cameras out there. Shouldn't we have a lot more suspected Bigfoot images? Obviously, a camera would need to be in "Bigfoot Country" just like any swamp ape would need a camera in "swamp ape" country. If Bigfoot is hungry and is attracted to the lure/ food in the line-of-sight, it should be a successful pic capture. Why are Bigfoot trail cam/motion cameras or videos in short supply? I still think they are the best chance to get the next PGF-level video but what does it tell us we don't have that yet? I have many times posted up numerous trail camera footage of alleged Bigfeet. Generally people pick them apart based on the fact that none of them look like the PGF. Just as you are unimpressed by the Jacobs photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backdoc Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 4 hours ago, norseman said: I have many times posted up numerous trail camera footage of alleged Bigfeet. Generally people pick them apart based on the fact that none of them look like the PGF. Just as you are unimpressed by the Jacobs photos. I’ll admit to that. That’s fair. Probably doesn’t help that people like me go into considering a trail cam video with a doubting Thomas mind-set. It might be open minded on the concept of Bigfoot but still assumes any reported cam video might be too good to be true. Always wonder how likely my wing of the Bigfoot world would accept a new video at PGF- level trail cam should it occur. Would it be impressive or dismissive as too-good-to-be-true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catmandoo Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 7 hours ago, Backdoc said: Bigfoot is hungry and is attracted to the lure/ food in the line-of-sight, it should be a successful pic capture. The soundscape of surveillance cameras is complicated and is obnoxious to the animal world. Noisy, hard to hide and off gas odors. Spiders and ants enjoy the magnetic fields from the batteries. Some plastics off gas formic acid and that translates to the smell of bee hives and ant hills= bear snack. I am not aware of any reports of an anteater going after a trail cam like bears do. Just an FYI; polypropylene and noryl do not off gas or absorb moisture. Cases made of PP by SeaHorse and Pelican have their place. Those cases have thick walls and do well to attenuate ultrasonic noises. I am reminded of an incident years ago involving trail cameras and small diameter trees in a shallow root ball environment. The researcher checked on the cameras and found the trees had been pushed over and the cameras were aimed at the ground. The statistics for trail camera sales need different categories. Not everyone is monitoring for a hunting season. Trail cameras are purchased for home / property security. Years ago, trail cameras were very expensive and the selection was limited. A cursory check of on line vendors shows a huge inventory, made overseas and many available for about $50. I have been watched putting up trail cameras and placing food. They spy on us and spying on them is difficult. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 47 minutes ago, Backdoc said: I’ll admit to that. That’s fair. Probably doesn’t help that people like me go into considering a trail cam video with a doubting Thomas mind-set. It might be open minded on the concept of Bigfoot but still assumes any reported cam video might be too good to be true. Always wonder how likely my wing of the Bigfoot world would accept a new video at PGF- level trail cam should it occur. Would it be impressive or dismissive as too-good-to-be-true. Well, to be fair? There is a lot of hoaxing going on. And the deepfake stuff is getting better by the day. But a common thing I hear among Bigfooters and skeptics alike? Is why don’t we get any camera trap photos? Well….. we do! We also get tons and tons of IPhone video of a dark figure walking across a slope or through a forest, etc, etc. To put it into perspective? People complain about grainy FLIR footage shot by a F/A 18 Super Hornet in regards to UAPs…..🤷♂️ And then as you say people become enthralled with a photo or video of a cryptid or whatever that then becomes the unrealistic bar by which everything else is measured. In Bigfootdom that’s the PGF. In the Loch Ness monster it’s the surgeons photo. In UFO’s it’s the McMinnville photo. Whatever. So when you don’t see a flying saucer…. You see a flying cigar? Your sighting doesn’t line up… Or you don’t see a bipedal hominid you see a quadruped ape thing? Again it doesn’t line up. All I can say from my 53 years of hunting and fishing is that something weird is going on in Pennsylvania AND Kentucky. If the Jacobs photos obviously showed a Bear in its two photos? Non of us would have heard about it. Is it proof? Of course not. But we do have proof of Chimp DNA in a national forest in Kentucky. That’s proof! What is it doing there? That remains to be seen. But without a doubt it’s weird. And if I was standing on my porch in Kentucky and heard or saw a Chimp in the woods? Where would my mind go? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chim Chim Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 15 hours ago, norseman said: If the Jacobs photos obviously showed a Bear in its two photos? Non of us would have heard about it. No doubt, and despite the fact that nobody can definitively say what it is there’s still no shortage of people flippantly dismissing it as a bear because the idea that it could be something else is one they don’t want to deal with. Just like Patty is a guy in a suit, sure….. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopelyrics Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 Hello Everyone, It’s been a while since I’ve posted on this forum but I’m glad to see there’s still healthy debate over these photos. I can see a tail on the creature on both photos, I really can and I always have. But equally, I’ve had some new glasses recently. Maybe I need a new prescription. Best regards, lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts