Huntster Posted July 11, 2022 Posted July 11, 2022 13 hours ago, Doug said: .........Pics for comparison. Grizzlies and polar bears probably aren't appropriate comparisons. Both have distinct physical characteristics that are notably different than black bears, particularly the shoulders, neck, and head. The pose os appropriate in some of those pics, though. It's a common pose for the haunches. 1 1 1
Larryzfoot Posted July 11, 2022 Posted July 11, 2022 1 hour ago, Huntster said: Why is mange being brought into this? The photo subject isn't hairless or patchy. The extraterrestrials appear to be the discussion participants. That makes no sense.... the question at hand is the nature of the photo's subject. Extraterrestrials have nothing to do with any of it. Apple and an orange. You have a bear feeding station with bears.... the one in the photo being another one of them. No aliens....
Huntster Posted July 11, 2022 Posted July 11, 2022 10 minutes ago, Larryzfoot said: ..........No aliens.... No mange........
Larryzfoot Posted July 12, 2022 Posted July 12, 2022 20 hours ago, Huntster said: No mange........ And......? It's still a bear... 1
Grubfingers Posted July 12, 2022 Author Posted July 12, 2022 21 hours ago, Larryzfoot said: You have a bear feeding station with bears.... Give me a break 😂 that’s not a bear feeding station and the bears and deer that visited were long gone when the young Sasquatch came. The reason nobody can find a bear photo doing this is because they can’t bend like that the torso is too long! Yes I’m calling it that until somebody proves me wrong.
Foxhill Posted July 12, 2022 BFF Patron Posted July 12, 2022 11 minutes ago, Larryzfoot said: And......? It's still a bear... The dead giveaway that it's a bear, is that there are very likely other photos either taken before or after that confirm what this is. But you will never see them...I wonder why 1
Grubfingers Posted July 12, 2022 Author Posted July 12, 2022 Just now, Foxhill said: The dead giveaway that it's a bear, is that there are very likely other photos either taken before or after that confirm what this is. But you will never see them...I wonder why No the camera had a 30 second delay and all the images are time stamped. They were all posted. Why would the deer hunter collecting deer photos even be asking friends and family for a week what it was before it was suggested he ask the BFRO if they seen anything like it. They told him it was a juvenile Sasquatch. 1
Huntster Posted July 12, 2022 Posted July 12, 2022 4 hours ago, Larryzfoot said: And......? It's still a bear... It's yet another worthless pic in a forest of worthless pics.
Grubfingers Posted July 12, 2022 Author Posted July 12, 2022 1 hour ago, Huntster said: It's yet another worthless pic in a forest of worthless pics. Until somebody gets a full frontal juvenile and then you’ll be like man that was the real deal.
Huntster Posted July 12, 2022 Posted July 12, 2022 1 hour ago, Grubfingers said: Until somebody gets a full frontal juvenile and then you’ll be like man that was the real deal.......... No pic or video will move the ball. We have half a century of proof of that with the PG film. It must be a carcass, it must be delivered to the most powerful sasquatch advocate on Earth (whoever that might be), and it must be delivered with the stealth and planning of a special ops military operation. 2
Foxhill Posted July 12, 2022 BFF Patron Posted July 12, 2022 7 hours ago, Grubfingers said: No the camera had a 30 second delay and all the images are time stamped. They were all posted. Why would the deer hunter collecting deer photos even be asking friends and family for a week what it was before it was suggested he ask the BFRO if they seen anything like it. They told him it was a juvenile Sasquatch. Of course.....everything on the internet is true, how could I have forgotten that..... 2
Catmandoo Posted July 12, 2022 Posted July 12, 2022 8 hours ago, Grubfingers said: They were all posted. Why would the deer hunter collecting deer photos even be asking friends and family for a week what it was before it was suggested he ask the BFRO if they seen anything like it. They told him it was a juvenile Sasquatch. There is a back story. A person(s) with the AIBR advised Mr. Jacobs to not deal with the BFRO. The BFRO is not a 'dot-org' non-profit. It is an entertainment company. The images from the camera are low resolution. No conclusions can be made. At the time of camera development that the images were taken, the capacitors for the LED flash were screamers. Metal mounting plates and 'bear boxes' are reflector / projectors of ultrasonic noise. No Sasquatch worth its dingle berries would / will get in front of an ultrasonic screamer. Bears, deers, coyotes, etc have stomachs that override the alert of ultrasonic noise when 'free' food is available. Not really fun, but I will show a 'what is it? image' from my 'lucky #2 camera'.
Huntster Posted July 12, 2022 Posted July 12, 2022 2 hours ago, Catmandoo said: .........Not really fun, but I will show a 'what is it? image' from my 'lucky #2 camera'. It's a juvenile sasquatch in a mangy bear suit!!! 1
Grubfingers Posted July 13, 2022 Author Posted July 13, 2022 5 hours ago, Catmandoo said: There is a back story. A person(s) with the AIBR advised Mr. Jacobs to not deal with the BFRO. The BFRO is not a 'dot-org' non-profit. It is an entertainment company. The images from the camera are low resolution. No conclusions can be made. At the time of camera development that the images were taken, the capacitors for the LED flash were screamers. Metal mounting plates and 'bear boxes' are reflector / projectors of ultrasonic noise. No Sasquatch worth its dingle berries would / will get in front of an ultrasonic screamer. Bears, deers, coyotes, etc have stomachs that override the alert of ultrasonic noise That is such BS right there AIBR never did that not sure who told you that I’ve read all the actual news on this. As far as hearing the camera that’s a good point some think this 4 foot naive juvenile did just that and tucked into a flip position in seconds to the second photo.
Dave Posted July 13, 2022 Posted July 13, 2022 On 7/10/2022 at 3:29 PM, Doug said: If the fact that there are those who saw sasquatches in the area proves that it is a sasquatch in Jacob's photo, then using that same logic, since bears were seen in the area and at the site it proves it to be a bear. Sightings in the area prove nothing as to what is in the pics. I truly believe that it is not a sasquatch and not a bear. What I do believe is that it is even more unbelievably a chimp. Everything except for sightings in the area, show it to be a chimp. If we've ruled out a bear, then the fact bears were in the area is irrelevant. If squatches are known to be in the area, then the possibility it could be one moves up a level. To my way of thinking, the value of this photo is we've eliminated the probability (from what I've read so far in the thread) that it's a bear. Therefore, we need to eliminate the next plausible match, of which, a squatch is one, along with a primate, like a chimp, as you've suggested. If we isolate the chimp, it seems we'd want to figure out how it got there. This leads me to a question overall that might be known to the forum: how often do we catch animals in places they're not supposed to be on trail cameras, like when some idiot exotic animal owner lets them free or they escape? Do we get pictures of tigers roaming the woods in Michigan? Or Kangaroos in Washington? These are over the top examples to ask the question of do we actually get pictures of chimps in the woods, say in Ohio? Or do we say we know this happens, but we don't have any (or much) evidence? 1 1
Recommended Posts