dead sasquatch photo?

Didn't he play for the Lakers?? Guard, I think....

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 26-3-2008 by Gemwolf]

reply to post by sherpa





Can anyone else see the "manhood"?

If this is a fake, someone is really sick.

'That' looks really real.....

reply to post by IMAdamnALIEN


Are you even reading the thread?

reply to post by jbondo


Sorry my friend, didnt see your post there.

Your right!

It is circumcised!

What does this tell us?

It could be an elaborate hoax.

Or maybe bigfeet are just born this way. Though I highly doubt it.

Im glad you caught that as well!

Sorry for not seeing your post.

reply to post by MrsEsterhouse


A photo is never enough to say whether the subject is a real bigfoot/yeti/whatever. Saying it is shows a willingness to believe over a willingness to find out the facts.

Until a DNA sample is provided and the body recovered, it's just a photo of something hairy, that does look like a bigfoot. That's it.

And don't get me started on those bloody electric aliens.

reply to post by IMAdamnALIEN


It's no problem!

Just giving you the business because I know you're better than that.

That's just it, It does look circumcised but I can't say for sure because as I said, I don't know what an erect one that's not would look like.

reply to post by dave420

IMO This is a real bigfoot or yeti or sasquatch. The anatomical structure is sound along with the face and hair. It would be quite the elaborate hoax if not real. your thoughts?

your post shows a willingness to take thinks out of context.

Originally posted by dave420
Until a DNA sample is provided and the body recovered, it's just a photo of something hairy, that does look like a bigfoot. That's it.

You used the same weak argument in my bigfoot thread. But I chose not to address it.

If somebody photographs something that looks like a bigfoot, it's safe to call it a bigfoot. Do we have to state that it's real ? No.

But to say that it's just something hairy that looks like bigfoot doesn't even adress the issue of whether it's real...

reply to post by NewWorldOver


Hey, did you get that link I posted on page 1?

I hope you didn't search too hard on the BFRO.

reply to post by dave420


DNA has been recovered in canada by the history channel series "Monster Quest"

Surprised you didn't know that!

They basically proved his existence... ah, who cares

I think this was debunked on another forum....


credits to the BigFoot ForumsBigFootForum Discussion

The item was exposed by Ammanuel Janssens Casteels as a hoax. I though he created it, but he did not. Here's the story from Michel reynal's Virtual Institute of Cryptozoology site:

The frozen mannikin (sic) of Bourganeuf

In 1997, what looked like a new version of the affair of the frozen man (this cadaver of a frozen hairy man shown in the US fairs, which Bernard Heuvelmans was able to study in 1968) occurred... in France !

It was indeed a hoax, and amusingly, our Belgish friends of the ABEPAR (which publishes the journal Cryptozoologia) are (involontarily) responsible. Emmanuel Janssens Casteels, animal sculptor and a collaborator of the magazine, relates in the June to August 1998 issue of Cryptozoologia that two friends of his have helped people who wanted to make a giant copy of Bernard Heuvelmans's frozen man :

"In fact, it was a sculpture made with sponge rubber on which hairs of horse tail have been pasted. The eyes have been simply bought from a provider specialized in taxidermy."

Of course, a crazy story was associated with the "show" of Bourganeuf, whose creator had obviously read Bernard Heuvelmans's book.

I tried to validate the claims, but most of what I found was in French

Other than being an actual BigFoot, this seems like the only other likely explanation IMO

I think it's a great picture and probably looks good in real life too. However the waxiness of the face is the first thing that caught my attention. It doesn't look quite real but maybe that's the embalming process?

One thing for everyone to remember is that most side show yetis and bigfoot's that science has had a chance to test have ended up as gafs. The addition of a penis is very thorough though if it is a gaf!

I'm still waiting for someone to go and dig up the 2 Bigfoot (male and female) that 'Bugs' claims to have shot (re: Coast to Coast). If you listen to the Tod Standing (fraud) show from last year with Art Bell, Bugs pretty much gives some great clues as to what creek he buried them beside. I'm sure it could be located by the clues he gives. I had a quick look via Google earth but it would help if someone familiar with the area got involved.

That is - of course if - (and this is a BIG if) - Bugs is telling the truth!

reply to post by IMAdamnALIEN


jeezzz that black and white photo of that 'thing' is the uglest sob iv ever seen

thanks for the nightmare

Quote from InfaRedMan

I think it's a great picture and probably looks good in real life too. However the waxiness of the face is the first thing that caught my attention. It doesn't look quite real but maybe that's the embalming process?

This waxiness first caught my attention too, especially in the color photo in my original link. then I thought about how "waxy" some dead people I've seen looked. Then I thought, maybe BF in this photo is not waxy enough!

What troubles me is......

If your going to go to the trouble to build what appears to be an anatomically(skeletal structure and muscles) correct model of BF where every hair looks llike it was set individually. Why give it a circumcised penis?
Can we even conclude his penis is circumcised? It is my understanding that when male animals die their penises often become erect. Could the BG just has a proportionately smaller penis than Homo Sapiens, and that said penis is erect in picture?

Im leaning towards Elaborate joke. Or real happy BF.

This is all speculation of course.

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by MrsEsterhouse

 

A photo is never enough to say whether the subject is a real bigfoot/yeti/whatever. Saying it is shows a willingness to believe over a willingness to find out the facts.

Until a DNA sample is provided and the body recovered, it's just a photo of something hairy, that does look like a bigfoot. That's it.

And don't get me started on those bloody electric aliens.

So in other words if I take a picture of my keyboard and show that picture to someone, they shouldn't believe that it's a real keyboard? With your train of thinking, every legitimate photograph (assuming any exist) can be proactively written off as nothing more than pictures of things that only appear to be real. Why even bother looking for evidence while taking such an approach?

Originally posted by jbondo
Hey, did you get that link I posted on page 1?
I hope you didn't search too hard on the BFRO.

Ah yes thanks for pointin that out. I actually spent good time on bigfootforums.com I'm surprised I never came across that.

So it was a French replication of 'the Iceman' which was supposedly displayed somewhere else? Hmm.

Apparently the Iceman WAS real but the man who was displaying it did create a replica because it wasn't pratical to display a rotting corpse to the public

So where is the real body? BAH. Cryptozoology is full of burned bridges.

I do belive that there are some sick people in this world who would cut up human and monkey bodies to make something like this for profit.

reply to post by jbondo


Well things that die a violent death often have erections and orgasm.
And maybe bigfoots have big dick who knows who cares. LOL

But well as for being cut or uncut maybe the skin was pulled back.

They had took a made a nice video of this bigfoot and the photos I will find it and post it.

reply to post by Optix


Sure they have winters remember M.A.S.H they had some cold winters on the show.

Here is a video some one made of it.
I have another one I will post.

www.youtube.com...