Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Breaking: Romanian Bigfoot Photos

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


I agree it looks like an action figure. e-bay has a similiar one, Item number: 270210671783 description: BIGFOOT SASQUATCH CRYPTOZOOLOGY A/F DOLL ART OOAK RARE!




posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by starskipper
 


Haha! I wouldn't doubt it! Seriously, that was my first thought-It looked like one of those G.I. Joe-sized figures that somebody blew up and superimposed over a background!



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by jbondo
 



Well I really don't care what's in the video. I like to look at the people. You have Roger Patterson who saw his chance in making a quick buck. He was a fan of bigfoot stories, and realized that if he had a video of one it would make him rich.

You have Clyde Reinke who was employeed by a movie company called American National Enterprise. Reinke claims that Petterson has a scheme to make a fake bigfoot documentary, that would be shown at the movies. Which happened and made a lot of money for Patterson.

Then you have Bob Heironimus, he said he was wearing the bigfoot custome. Witnesses saw a gorrilla custome in Heironimus car after the incident.

A costume store owner named Philip Morris claims to have sold Patterson a brown gorrilla suit, and sent extra fur with it.

Two days before Patterson shot his film he rent a video camera, for the purpose of video taping bigfoot.

If you want to believe that Patterson got extremly lucking and found bigfoot when he just so happened to rent a video camera days before, go for it. Using modern day science and technology we can not even come close to what Patterson did. Today we have teloscopic cameras, motion activated cameras, and even satellites that can find bigfoot. But, yet he is still elusive. I'm not saying bigfoot is a fake, I'm saying Patterson is.

People can break down the footage all they want, and say how real the muscle and fur look. What I see is a man that had an agenda and a motive. The people that have come up and spoke out, have nothing to gain. There not looking for fame or money like Patterson. They just want the truth out.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 10:43 AM
link   
I don't mean to interrupt the Patterson footage discussion, but I think I've found the costume this guy is wearing. Check it out:

thehorrordome.com...



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by hbdale309
I don't mean to interrupt the Patterson footage discussion, but I think I've found the costume this guy is wearing. Check it out:

thehorrordome.com...


Bingo, I think you found it. Nice job.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by testrat

Originally posted by hbdale309
I don't mean to interrupt the Patterson footage discussion, but I think I've found the costume this guy is wearing. Check it out:

thehorrordome.com...


Bingo, I think you found it. Nice job.


LOL-I don't know...I think the costume in his link looks more realistic than the Romanian one.


Hey if nothing else, the Romanian one is good for some chuckles!



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Wow, look at those perfectly sculpted and shaved abs. I must have Bigfoot's workout routine


In the immortal words of Mitch Hedberg, "I think the problem is that Bigfoot IS blurry!"



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Well I think I found a couple more pictures. The first one is a little blurry, but the second one you can clearly make out the face!








posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   
AAAAAHAHAHA...That's it-It's the Jack Links Bigfoot. He was out hunting for some Jerky.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 02:19 PM
link   
My number one reason for calling these fake is the fact that in the first full body picture the surrounding picture and even the body are very clear, but the face looks intentionally pixelated or blurred IMO.

As to the Patterson footage, Controversy surrounds but I do have to wonder why first they would make a female costume which would be harder due to the mammary glands. There is evidence of muscle movement as well as a bulging muslce area in her hamstring that looks like a typical and expected injury of a bipedal animal in this terrain and of that size.
Also, have you noticed how horrible bigfoot costumes are for the most part, Aside from harry and the hendersons and maybe the Jack Links commercials I have yet to see a decent non gorilla looking suit. MY husband finds it necessary to rent every horrible bigfoot movie he finds at blockbuster, So i have sat through hours of awful BF costumes, most would make you laugh till you cry, big drooling zombie ape looking things.

There is also a fluidity of movement that is lacking in most other footage and recreations that i have seen.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I laughed so hard when I saw those pictures!!!


Wow,
Some people really need to start looking for an actual Bigfoot, instead of buying a monkey suit and asking your friends "Does this look real, or should I pose like this?"

Give me a break!



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


I'm keeping my opinion on an action figure, my reasoning is that the thing is placed behind what looks like the bottom of a tree or exposed roots. That would be a mighty big tree if this was a 6 plus foot tall man in a costume.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Boy! Loren Coleman will publish anything these days!



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by gluetrap
 


That's a good point about the face. Something is very weird with it-It may be pixelation like you said. It does appear blurry as opposed to the body and feet. Maybe some photo shop to blur out a goofy mask?



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Heheh...too funny. Yep - man in suit alright...



J.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
MY theory is that the 'bigfoot' is no larger than action figure. Actually I believe that the 'bigfoot' is an action figure carrying a small stick. Good find though, I always enjoy Dimensional Detectives threads.


sty

posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 05:48 PM
link   
lol , that area is famous for illegal wood exploitation ..i did not know it was always Bigfoot!



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 05:35 AM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


In my opinion it's a costume; albeit a cool looking one. As pointed out, it's not as good looking as the Patterson costume, though.



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 07:22 AM
link   
The interesting thing about the Patterson-Gimlin footage, is every time you seem to close in on the solution, something else seems to crop up that makes one wonder.

One thing that always struck me about the 'fakeness', is the lack of movement in the torso and the lack of movement of the breasts.

There's no movement or sway and the middle torso looks very stiff, like a packed suit might look.

However, then I read a post on the BF forum about the size of the 'head'.

When you think about it, one thing that is evident in many gorilla costumes and prosthetic heads is that they seem to be a bit bigger, due to the fact that there's a human head inside and the prosthetics, padding hair and other layers make it disproportionally bigger.

Looking at the P-G footage, what strikes me is that the head is actually one size too small to be a costume.

IOW, it looks about the size that it would be for a real creature.

Again, it's subtle, but it's enough to be provocative.

The other major thing is the reaction. When you see a 'wild' creature in the wild move, there's a suddenness and a rapidity of movement that is evident. There is none of that in the P-G footage. I'd expect to see the creature get down on all-fours to maximize the distance between it and the two riders, or do something that a human just could not do.



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by testrat
 


I almost forgot about this thread. To respond to your video camera rental comment. He did get a video camera specifically to film Bigfoot because that was the whole point of it, getting film of BF. Many people view this as part of the proof that it's a fake. Yes, he was out looking for the thing and he did have all the equipment to film it. However, just because he actually did allegedly find it and film it should be no reason to deny validity. If the BFRO filmed a BF on one of their excursions would we be saying they faked it because they were prepared?

You know, I don't completely endorse the footage and I do say that I'm around 80% on the belief side of BF but to completely dismiss something like this is a bit narrow, don't you think?

Badge, maybe I'm misunderstanding but what makes you think that BF could drop to all fours and run away if they are bipedal?





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join