Best Bigfoot pic since Patterson Film?

page: 5
36
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 05:47 AM
link   
I think it looks like a primate sitting with it's back to the camera. You know how you sit sometimes on the ground/floor with your right leg bent close to you and your left leg bent at the knee while putting most of your weight on your left hand/arm? (I wish I was decent n photoshop so I could mark it up like the other poster to make it easier for y'all to see.
What folks are saying is the "cub" looks to me like the right leg bent at the knee.

I'm NOT saying bigfoot, but from the angle it does look like a primate to me.




posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


At first the picture was striking, looking like a Bigfoot but upon closer inspection ...




The yellow lines represent lines we can see, one can even make out the direction of the sun on the fur. The sun appears to be shining from the left in this picture. I used grey dotted lines to emphasize possible finishing of lines that cannot be seen because its in the shadow, then the green circle looks to be a snout.

Having to guess, it looks like bear scratching his head or ear on the ground in the most awkward way. But I will admit I cannot make out his front arms or have an explanation of the blob of fur to the right of the outlined object. One could assume its another smaller bear/cub.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


pretty obviously a bear and a cub.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


To me it looks like a black bear in a rather unflattering position.



I was ready to say bear, but look how thick those bears legs are? In the picture its skinnier and looks more like an arm. Also, if that's a bear half its body is underground. It looks more like something sitting down, flush with the ground, rather than a bear digging. If its digging, than its pretty deep
edit on 7-8-2012 by PvtHudson because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 07:07 AM
link   
Reading all the foolish people who refuse to see that it's a bear actually made me create an account.

To those silly silly geese...how do you explain the urine that's clearly shooting out of this bear's hindside? It's laughable to even entertain that it's a primate of any type let alone a Sasquatch, but a Sasquatch/primate that urinates out of its shoulder? LMAO! SMH.
edit on 7-8-2012 by AHuxley because: (no reason given)
edit on 7-8-2012 by AHuxley because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 07:35 AM
link   
I see a bigfoot (or hoax) from behind, sitting with left arm down and right leg/knee visible.
If it's a hoax it's pretty well done as the auburn hair, hair length, cone head and very muscular arm all match up to the best available images/video including paterson - gimlin.

Can't believe people can't see that sitting position?



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 07:41 AM
link   
The first few posters claiming its a bear and a cub.. this is a TRAIL cam, which takes photos in intervals. If the "big bear" wasa laying or sitting, and the "cub" was laying with its parent.. the trail cam would of snapped many more pics of these "two bears". It takes more then a couple seconds for two bears to get up and move out of view from the trail cam. So its deffinately not a bear and cub.

Nor is it a chimpanzee
(someone on the first page claimed that ..) Alberta doesnt have chimps lol! This is Canada, its not popular place for monkeys


Its hard to make out a species, judging by the brown colour and size of the forearm I would have to say primate. By the akward position this animal is in, makes it very difficult to identify with all that fur and big bulky body. Brown bear is the most logical answer, giving this is Alberta, Canada. But the forearm and fur makes me feel its a primate. Not the first "bigfoot" sighting or story in Alberta either.. not saying it is a sasquatch though.

I do not think this is a hoax at all. The picture is too clear and the setting of grassy, wooded area is not tampered with by computer as one can see.

Regardless, this pictures needs to be sent to professionals.

~ Love is an art



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 08:13 AM
link   
The question I'd like answered is what is the height of that grass and those wild flowers? Looks like that might 3-4 foot grasses as I see no soil anywhere, nor do I see the base of any of those trees. I'll try to find the specie of those tall wild flowers to learn their late summer height.

I don't see any animal sitting, because I'd expect to see some part of the legs on the ground in front of it, compressing down the grasses. instead I seem to see tall grass immediately in front of the larger animal. And if the animal(s) were sitting, the timed trail cam would probably gotten another shot (assuming a shot per 30 seconds).

It looks to me like its walking in tall underbrush, looking down and to the right, The left appendage to me looks completely primate, with a large shoulder mass, upper arm shaped as expected and a powerful forearm that curves towards a wrist in the right direction. I see a broad back slimming to a waist. I see no real neck, just massive deltoid structure, as expected.

For those of you who say there is no evidence of a bipedal unacknowledged primate, you are mistaken. There is a massive amount of evidence, both direct, anecdotal, circumstantial, historical and on most every continent. Most in the mainstream are simply unaware of the volume of evidence,

edit on 7-8-2012 by pajoly because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by zazzafrazz
or ....
A bear taking a dump?


edit on 6-8-2012 by zazzafrazz because: (no reason given)



I wonder if he used a rabbit afterwords....?



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


Ok - I had to chime in on this. I did an image search for Gorillas, (which of course makes me an expert) and to me - this is what it looks the most like. Bear butts are rounded, not pointy. Look at a gorilla head, and then look at the picture again. Especially mountain gorillas - they look very similar to this.

It could be a bear butt - perhaps something happened to the bear to make his butt swell up in a pointy way - and he stuck his head in the ground up to his shoulders to try and not think about it. Let some air get to it for a bit or something - I have no idea.

Seriously though - looking through the gorilla pics - many of them sit in the jungle exactly like what is shown in this picture - with their babies beside them.

New, never before seen primates have been found very recently in the world. There is no reason why a new species couldn't be found in Canada.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 08:34 AM
link   


I don't see any animal sitting, because I'd expect to see some part of the legs on the ground in front of it, compressing down the grasses. instead I seem to see tall grass immediately in front of the larger animal.


That's what I was thinking until I looked up pictures of gorillas on Google - check it out if you get a chance. You wouldn't necessarily see legs straight out in front - they sit with their legs kind of pulled in close.

Here's a decent pic - think of how it would look if you saw this guy from behind.

kimcaptures.photoshelter.com...



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 08:36 AM
link   
As I stated in an earlier reply which was completely ignored...

THE BENT OVER BEAR IS URINATING!!!! HOW MANY PRIMATES DO YOU KNOW WHICH URINATE OUT OF THEIR SHOULDERS?
edit on 7-8-2012 by AHuxley because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by LoveisanArt
 



The first few posters claiming its a bear and a cub.. this is a TRAIL cam, which takes photos in intervals. If the "big bear" wasa laying or sitting, and the "cub" was laying with its parent.. the trail cam would of snapped many more pics of these "two bears". It takes more then a couple seconds for two bears to get up and move out of view from the trail cam. So its deffinately not a bear and cub.


You are assuming that we have been provided all of the evidence and a factual account of the events. Maybe there were several pictures and this strange photo was the only one released in an effort to create speculation (it seems to have worked). 



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Either a bear or an ape. Bigfoot does not exist in North America, Though I am certain large undiscovered apes exist in other parts of the world.. I believe that large apes exist in South America however, and in Asia.
edit on 7-8-2012 by sensible1 because: spelling



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
The Patterson film was the best we will ever get, but the herd refuses to accept it then and now. Even if we produced a corspe people would deny the authenticity.

I am afraid the ship has sailed as far as this generation is concerned.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


Anyone know what the plural of bigfoot should be ?
Bigfeet ? Bigfoots ? Bigfeets ?



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
First, it is a summer time picture evidenced by the blooming plants. Second, it seems to be from an area not beat down by foot traffic so that can throw doubt on it being from some caged or penned creature whether bear, gorilla, etc.

I assume that the appendage on the right side is a rear leg and the back of the creature angles down to the right. Rather than classifying the high spot as a rump it seems to mear that there is a small form draped over that rump and that there is a face with mouth and eyes apparent on it facing downward. However, what could be a face does not look like what I would assume would be a Sasquatch. Rather, it looks more dog-like.

What do others see. Is that a small body bending over a larger body? And could that be an arm of it that hangs down over the larger appendage of the bigger body?

(Please consult the original image for your determinations. Any subsequent ones with colored lines tend to fit that person's concept of what is the situations and obstructs other interpretations.)
edit on 7-8-2012 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by intelligenthoodlum33
 



The Patterson film was the best we will ever get, but the herd refuses to accept it then and now. Even if we produced a corspe people would deny the authenticity. 

I am afraid the ship has sailed as far as this generation is concerned.


So people who doubt the existence of Bigfoot after watching the grainy black and white Patterson film of a guy in a gorilla suit are part of "the herd"?


If that video (or the pic in the OP) is your idea of scientific evidence then maybe it is you that's part of a herd. There is not one piece of scientific evidence proving the existence of Bigfoot; not one.   

Please produce a corpse then we'll talk about proof. Until then it remains an often hoaxed myth. 



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Tazkven
 



After giving this more thought I believe it is two bears playing.

The angle of the snout circled in green just seemed at an angle impossible to achieve by the bear in the foreground.



I believe this is two young bears playing and one has pounced on the other, You can barely make out the snout of the bear on bottom, the rest of him appears to be a blob of fur to the right, out lines in teal.

They most likely did not linger long ...



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


I can't make out which end we're looking at


Is this animal bent over and stretching out?





top topics
 
36
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join