JESUS CHRIST PEOPLE! It is not a gorilla. Unless gorillas have pointy ears and a tail. Get the original wmv and stop it at 3:13

Exactly. In fact, I would think that if the camera was in the mouth of the creature, there wouldn't be enough light, plus too close to focus on the teeth, like it did.

Originally posted by Dr Love
First, what are we supposed to assume from the dropping of the camera? Second, why not just film whatever it is from your car where you can at least balance the camera? Third, why are they just filming trees as they go by, and yes, they just happen to give you that shot of the camera in the sideview mirror just to give you that feeling of authenticity? Fourth, what are the odds of this thing showing up while they just happen to be filming trees for no reason?

Your points are valid but also very vague. Meaning that what you say that is apparently 'suspicious' is also very common.

What are we supposed to assume from him dropping the camera? Well obviously that the camera man was attacked by the creature in question. Now maybe he got killed, maybe his friend helped him and everything is ok. Maybe they managed to get free, make it back to the truck and drive as fast as they can. Why leave the tape/camera I hear you ask? Well I know personally if it was me who just got attacked by a wild creature, I'd leg it back to the car as soon as possible. I wouldn't think twice about picking up the camera. That could stay there as far as I was concerned. There's a beast outside the truck!

You then ask why he didn't film it from the car? Well that's a very valid point, but the way you ask it seems like you find him running after the creature in question odd. It's human nature to be inquisitive and we always try to get a better shot. He was thinking in a split second remember! Let's say it is a gorilla. Seeing these creatures in Ohio is very uncommon, so he wanted to jump off and get a better angle to film the event. It's possible and shouldn't be overlooked. We do things in the spur of the moment.

Then you ask why are they filming trees as they go past. Do we know the background of the people filming? Are they from the area? Were they on vacation? It's very plausible that they wanted to capture the surrounding beauty of Michigan so were filming the trees. I recently went down my local river and countryside with a camera to take photographs which I then edited on my computer. If I had taken a photo of Bigfoot or something similar, you would ask why I randomly 'just had' a camera handy! Then when eyewitnesses write reports of seeing an apparent Bigfoot, sceptics say WHY DIDN'T THEY HAVE A CAMERA HANDY!? You can't win.



You claim that giving a shot of the camera in the mirror adds suspicion. Another valid point and it could totally be a hoax. But in the same breath it was only pointed out as far as I know on the Youtube version of the video, where it was broken down, slowed down and analysed in more detail. The man/lady with the camera could just be panning back and forth and captured a shot of the camera in a mirror. There's nothing supernatural, odd or suspicious here as far as I'm concerned. It happens! If they planned to do that because the whole thing is a hoax then that's a different story. But getting the camera flashing in a mirror, happens!

Again, you lastly point out "what are the odds of this thing showing up while they just happen to be filming trees for no reason?" You know they were filming the trees for no reason do you? Please provide links and evidence showing that they were. I've already pointed out that they could be on holiday taking footage, they could be keen film enthusiasts taking shots of the surrounding beauty. There's many alternative reasons. And yes the odds are very slim of you ever seeing something mysterious, but that's not a statement you can use to debunk apparent paranormal activity. Things happen when you least expect it and like I said above, the believers or anyone who wanted evidence, would be screaming WHY DIDN'T YOU HAVE A CAMERA AT THAT TIME IT APPEARED! DAMN! if they didn't capture it on film/footage.

Now it looks like I'm defending the footage, which I'm not. I'm just putting forward my views on what you said. Everything you said was negative towards the footage without proper reason, as what you claim is 'odd and suspicious' can be answered with possible theories. I fully respect your comments and they all add to the discussion.

It could very well be fake or genuine. I'm totally on the fence really. We need to know more background info on the camera operators and why they were in the area? What happened to the camera operator also?!

it seems to have a lot of mass or dense fur. i see pointy something (maybe ears or horns) the teeth shot looks real but it looks edited in.

Well looks like a fake to me. At 3:07 into the film the frame totaly has been spliced yet the clock still ticks the same. And at 3:13 like every one says it has horns and a tail...... You people are nuts. The video is to old, fuzzy, and grainy to see a tail and horns at any point in the video. And the fact the camera actualy gets an open mouth and an eye just at the end...thats just to hollywood.

[edit on 29-9-2007 by Osyris]

For all the people who think this is a bear or wolverine here you go. The adult wolverine is about the size of a medium dog, with a length usually ranging from 65-87 cm (25-34 inches), a tail of 17-26 cm (7-10 inches), and weight of 10-25 kg (22-55 lb). Males are as much as 30 percent larger than the females. The possibilty of this being a wolverine is thrown out, the animal was much larger then 55lbs, I'd give a giant wolverine maybe 85 lbs, but the animal in question looks about 250lb+. As for it being a bear, the hind legs take that out of the question, and also the fur. Bears have a shaggy coat not a fluffy coat like the animal here. As for it being a gorilla the stance at first looks like a gorilla but then when it runs it takes the gorilla out of question. I've looked at the gorilla film you posted do you see the male gorillas tend to begin to run upright after a few steps thats so the animal can use its powerful arms to clober prey. This animal stays on all fours the entire run, and would have pounced from his position. The fur also takes gorillas away to fluffy for a primate coat. Any other animals you got to throw at me be my guess.

You can't tell the exact size of the animal by a simple film. You don't have footprints neither measurements. The shots from the mouth could be of an animal of any size, since pretty much any mouth size could engulf that camera lens. Is just a matter of perspective.

But, by body proportions and by the attack characteristics, that's a wolverine.

How in the hell can anyone in their right mind look at that and think its a dog???? Have you people lost your minds? For all the people that yell fake, why dont you ever show proof to back up your intelligent claims? What tells you its fake? Because you cant explain it? Great reasoning. As for the teeth and ridges, many animals have them, including of course humans.

[edit on 29-9-2007 by shug7272]

[edit on 29-9-2007 by shug7272]

Very interesting development... I just noticed that the "Gable film" has been removed from the site. According to the note there is some new evidence that is being investigated with a report to follow. Sounds like somebody is on to something. This could be a very interesting breakthrough for this discussion.

[edit on 29-9-2007 by duster]

Shug it's called common sense. Check out the part where it begins to run right after 3: 13, if you were born with eyes Im sure you can see that it has a tail and pointy ears. We can explain it that's why we make the claim. What makes you think it is not? Also who said that it was a dog?

[edit on 29-9-2007 by Shifter2012]

[edit on 29-9-2007 by Shifter2012]

Originally posted by duster
Very interesting development... I just noticed that the "Gable film" has been removed from the site. According to the note there is some new evidence that is being investigated with a report to follow. Sounds like somebody is on to something. This could be a very interesting breakthrough for this discussion.

[edit on 29-9-2007 by duster]

...Or a viral media campaign like blair witch. Cmon it has all the tell tale signs a somehing like that. Slickly shot, with copyrighted material, ect, just screams not real to me.

I would agree with that Pavil, my feelings exactly