Swamp Ape/ Bigfoot... Some compelling video taken in Jan 2015.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: YUIL553

That has been covered many times in this thread. It is difficult and dangerous to walk through swamp, especially when you're in a suit all wet.

But it wasn't seen moving very far and we don't know the conditions there with certainty. How deep is that swamp right there? Have they placed any material there like stones, lumber, or logs?

Watch this video from that park. It appears to show a bigfoot bust in the swamp. @ 1:52 the reporter says "But Legand (the ranger in the vid) points out the swamp in this park is extremely shallow".

@ 1:57 Legand says "If something was in there you would see,,, see it. It would be probably, ankle deep."

That swamp is much deeper than ankle...call the preserve and ask. I believe last I checked it was up to 10 ft in some areas.

Ten feet in some areas does not mean 10' where the "creature" entered the water. Obviously, it's quite shallow. As for no one being stupid enough to splash and step in the water in a swamp, there is no shortage of very stupid people and if this is a man in a costume, he probably wasn't in the water for more than a few seconds.

Look carefully at the length of the "creature's" legs. Although bent, they're human (not ape) length. When the "creature" walks, the knees come up unnaturally high and the back comes as they do in a person who is trying to move while bent over with arms hanging down attempting to simulate the movement of an ape. Try to mimic the walk yourself while bent over with arms hanging down and you'll understand what I mean. Apes have very short legs and their walk doesn't produce the same effect.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

If you watch carefully it seems like that the "baby bigfoot" raised it's head on "mama's" back before jumping off.

OK here's a snap from the frame @ 1:17. It's not the best frame but I'm kinda in a hurry now. You really have to look at it in the video, but now you see where I was talking about.

overall view for reference


edited specification



wow dunno why it not embeding it. using img

a reply to: Arrestme

Those are the reflections of trees. I think this is a simple case pareidolia.

a reply to: Arrestme

Aaaah I see it now. Spooky.

wow dunno why it not embeding it. using img

You can upload it here. Click on down arrow up there then click on upload.

a reply to: Tangerine

I posted the video here originally. I cannot say 100% for sure if this is a "bigfoot" "swamp ape". That being said.. I think if it is.... It does not do any good to compare it to any known animal. Lets say it is a bigfoot for a second than it is a yet to be discovered biped. I also am not sure how much you can put into the tricks of light off the water and think you are seeing something.

I am on the fence about this.. I posted it because I thought it was the best video I have ever seen with a "bigfoot". I think it is better than the Patterson/Gimlin video. Something about the way it is interacting in the wild and the way it moves strikes real and I have no idea why I think that to be so. I watched it the first time and was blown away...

I also think it is not strange the person who filmed this has not come forward and does not seem to be wanting "credit" for the video.

a reply to: Tangerine

if it were an undescribed species though the morphology would be unknown

the lack of any backstory is starting look very suspicious to me, added to the fact that there have been a couple of very recent hoaxes in the same place

i think the best chance of showing it bogus from the video itself would be a still showing the moment before the feet go into the water - i think i get the hint of a boot but it might be imagination

i find the head movement when it hears the sound oddly convincing though - whatever it is seems genuinely startled

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

It could be, but you seriously jumped to conclusions. I'll do the same and assume you didn't even look at the video.
Otherwise you'd notice how that shape doesn't move with the water, and it certainly isn't reflecting equally with the woods.

"It's a tree"? Seriously, show me the ape-figured tree oh smart one. Look at the video.
I'm not saying it's got alien camouflage, I'm saying the shape outline doesn't remain constant with water flow and reflections. You can't just say, it's a tree and expect anyone to understand that. It looks more like it could be sitting just underwater, perhaps with a reed or some kind of make-shift snorkel.

a reply to: Tangerine

All good points.

a reply to: Arrestme

It's a reflection

One problem I do have with the video, are these strange artifacts in between shots. Maybe someone knows why these would be there, but more importantly, if they are known artifacts of any video manipulation software. Or things like time-frames-anchors, or even something like what that guy in the 9/11 truthers videos shows as the way you can see a video is edited in the "nose-in/nose-out" theory. Or maybe they're just artifacts.

Anyone recognize em?

Here I only filtered the section I saw the shapes in:

Here's the next one, whole image filtered to highlight artifacts:

Last one which shows the barely seen moving ones around the edges. When you watch it in the video, you see they all travel upwards, and aren't stationary like this image. They move and change colors as the video progresses. Some are even seen within the video framing. Why is this?

a reply to: Deaf Alien

I see no reflection. There's no body shape anywhere above the waterline.

a reply to: Arrestme

It could be, but you seriously jumped to conclusions.

you think it's an underwater chimpanzee with a make-shift reed-snorkel and you're accusing someone of jumping to conclusions?

great stuff

it looks like the bush that is in exactly the right spot to be reflected off the water to me

a reply to: aynock

well yea, it's reflecting. So technically it's a reflection. But the shape doesn't change. I only assume a snorkel because how else could it be underwater. Every1 wonders how these things aren't ever seen, but if they do exist, it'd be because they're really good at it from young ages. The images shows an ape-sitting outline. It reflects light, and the trees. You say I should ignore the outline because it's reflecting what it's supposed to? Not saying I believe it, but really, you don't have an argument for this. Hence the jumping to conclusions.

You're not allowed to, since you're not standing on anything. You can try to knock me down, but what I'm standing on-I can just stand back on. You have to destroy that before I'll stop standing up for it. Where's the shape in the trees? Not color, not shadows. SHAPE!!!

a reply to: Arrestme

Yeah the shape doesn't change but the ripples and waves in water will change the reflection of shapes.

Forget it, I did it myself. I may have jumped to a conclusion, and wild speculation, but I definitely didn't assume. That # looks like a monkey.

But I can admit where I was wrong, when actual facts get produced. Fitting I had to do it myself tho, ofc no1 would believe it's a water-foot of sorts. lol

debunked (officially (cuz not lazy ( )))

a reply to: Arrestme

LOL I was about to post.

a reply to: Arrestme

You're not allowed to, since you're not standing on anything. You can try to knock me down, but what I'm standing on-I can just stand back on. You have to destroy that before I'll stop standing up for it. Where's the shape in the trees? Not color, not shadows. SHAPE!!!

you realise that a reflection would be upside down right?

Every1 wonders how these things aren't ever seen, but if they do exist, it'd be because they're really good at it from young ages.

good at snorkelling from a young age? well that would explain a lot

eta: just seen your latest post - cool

damn dropcanvas isn't embeding teh images.
I overlapped the reversed trees over the water with 57% transparency, so one on top of the other and it does line up strangely well.